- From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@yahoo-inc.com>
- Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2007 13:42:56 +1100
- To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- Cc: member-accesscontrol-tf@w3.org, public-appformats@w3.org
There's already a HTTP header registry, and it doesn't require any particular format for the syntax specification; http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc3864.txt Cheers, On 2007/02/17, at 5:08 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote: > > On Fri, 16 Feb 2007 04:40:36 +0100, Mark Nottingham <mnot@yahoo- > inc.com> wrote: >> There's informal, unofficial activity (disclaimer: I'm one of the >> instigators) on the HTTP WG list to revise RFC2616, but the stated >> intent is to get a WG and make it formal. See: >> <http://www.w3.org/Protocols/HTTP/1.1/rfc2616bis/> > > And that will also define a registration mechanism for HTTP headers > which requires the use of ABNF as opposed to EBNF? > > Anyway, I'll have a look once the rest is settled... > > > -- > Anne van Kesteren > <http://annevankesteren.nl/> > <http://www.opera.com/> > -- Mark Nottingham mnot@yahoo-inc.com
Received on Saturday, 17 February 2007 02:43:37 UTC