- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2010 14:14:04 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=9530 Summary: Validity of meta "pragmas" Product: HTML WG Version: unspecified Platform: PC OS/Version: Windows NT Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: HTML5 spec bugs AssignedTo: dave.null@w3.org ReportedBy: julian.reschke@gmx.de QAContact: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org CC: ian@hixie.ch, mike@w3.org, public-html@w3.org "4.2.5.4 Other pragma directives" restricts the set of allowed values in http-equiv: "Extensions to the predefined set of pragma directives may, under certain conditions, be registered in the WHATWG Wiki PragmaExtensions page. [WHATWGWIKI] Such extensions must use a name that is identical to an HTTP header registered in the Permanent Message Header Field Registry, and must have behavior identical to that described for the HTTP header. [IANAPERMHEADERS] Pragma directives corresponding to headers describing metadata, or not requiring specific user agent processing, must not be registered; instead, use metadata names. Pragma directives corresponding to headers that affect the HTTP processing model (e.g. caching) must not be registered, as they would result in HTTP-level behavior being different for user agents that implement HTML than for user agents that do not. Anyone is free to edit the WHATWG Wiki PragmaExtensions page at any time to add a pragma directive satisfying these conditions. Such registrations must specify the following information: Keyword The actual name being defined. The name must match a previously-registered HTTP name with the same requirements. Brief description A short non-normative description of the purpose of the pragma directive. Specification A link to the specification defining the corresponding HTTP header. Conformance checkers must use the information given on the WHATWG Wiki PragmaExtensions page to establish if a value is allowed or not: values defined in this specification or listed on the aforementioned page must be accepted, whereas values not listed in either this specification or on the aforementioned page must be rejected as invalid. Conformance checkers may cache this information (e.g. for performance reasons or to avoid the use of unreliable network connectivity)." Problems: #1: Validity depends on the current content of the Wiki registry. I'd like to see proof that conformance checkers are actually going to implement this. #2: There is no registration procedure. If anybody can add, can anybody remove as well? #3: The whole concept is in conflict with HTML4, which delegated the contents of http-equiv directly to the related IETF specs #4: The registry procedure on the referenced Wiki page is out-of-sync with the spec text, it claims "...Such extensions are limited to previously-registered HTTP headers defined in an RFC, ..." #5: The specification link on the registry page refers to a different document outside the W3C spec, so not the HTML5 spec. #6: It's not clear at all that requiring an entry in the permanent registry is required. -- Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Thursday, 15 April 2010 14:18:05 UTC