- From: Daniel Veditz <dveditz@mozilla.com>
- Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2025 13:40:21 -0800
- To: Daniel Stenberg <daniel@haxx.se>
- Cc: Mike Taylor <miketaylr@google.com>, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>, Yoav Weiss <yoav.weiss@shopify.com>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, Patrick Meenan <patmeenan@gmail.com>, Steven Bingler <bingler@google.com>, רועי ברקאי <roybarkayyosef@gmail.com>, Watson Ladd <watsonbladd@gmail.com>, Yoav Weiss <yoav@yoav.ws>, Rory Hewitt <rory.hewitt@gmail.com>, Colin Bendell <colin.bendell@shopify.com>, Joakim Erdfelt <joakim@webtide.com>
On Mon, Feb 24, 2025 at 7:25 AM Daniel Stenberg <daniel@haxx.se> wrote: > The fact that the syntax is specified twice in the spec, and they are > different, is a recipe for exactly this, and it has been so ever since 6265 RFC 6265 did not create that problem, it tried to make sense of how the web was already working. By documenting it, and arguing about the corner cases where implementations diverged, we nudged implementations into much more consistent and compatible behavior than existed before RFC 6265. -Dan Veditz
Received on Tuesday, 25 February 2025 21:40:51 UTC