- From: Tommy Pauly <tpauly@apple.com>
- Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2022 21:32:14 -0700
- To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, Roy Fielding <fielding@gbiv.com>
These updates all sound good. Thanks, Mark! Tommy > On Mar 30, 2022, at 9:12 PM, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> wrote: > > Hi everyone, > > Wearing my hat as IANA Expert for the HTTP Field Name registry (and CC:ing my co-expert for his feedback): > > I've been doing a pass through the registry to assure that entries are up-to-date, and am planning a few changes that I'd like community input on. Please say if you have any concerns or other feedback about the proposed changes below. > > 1. The following header fields are all registered as 'provisional', are based upon Internet-Drafts that expired a long time ago, and have not seen any recent deployment to the best of my knowledge. The proposal is to remove them from the registry. > > - Optional, Resolution-Hint, Resolver-Location: draft-girod-w3-id-res-ext > - Compliance, Non-Compliance: Mogul, J., Cohen, J., and S. Lawrence, "Specification of HTTP/1.1 OPTIONS messages > - SubOK, Subst: Mogul, J. and A. van Hoff, "Duplicate Suppression in HTTP" > - UA-Color, UA-Media, UA-Pixels, UA-Resolution, UA-Windowpixels: Masinter, L., Montulli, L., and A. Mutz, "User-Agent Display Attributes Headers" > > 2. RFC2068 defined "URI" and "Public", but 2616 obsoleted it without carrying them forward. They are currently registered as 'permanent'; the proposal is to mark them as 'obsoleted'. > > 3. Similarly, 2068 defined "Content-Version" and "Derived-From" for use with PATCH, but they were not carried into RFC5789. The proposal is to mark them as 'obsoleted'; they are currently 'permanent'. > > Cheers, > > > -- > Mark Nottingham https://www.mnot.net/ > >
Received on Thursday, 31 March 2022 04:32:35 UTC