Re: action-231, issue-153 requirements on other software that sets DNT headers

On Aug 23, 2012, at 5:45 PM, Nicholas Doty wrote:

> On 8/1/12 12:06 PM, David Wainberg wrote:
>> This looks ok to me. However, I am contemplating additional language
>> regarding a UA's responsibility to reconcile conflicts (issue 150?) or
>> ensure the user's choice, but I've not written it yet.
> 
> I think maybe we could address issue 150 (at least the version where multiple incompatible headers are sent) just by letting servers handle it the way they handle any syntactically invalid HTTP headers. Roy, is there anything we need to add to the ABNF in 4.2 to make it clear that only a single DNT header is valid?

Nope.  HTTP does not allow a header field to appear more than once
unless the field-value is defined as a comma-separated list.

Of course, that doesn't tell us what the recipient should do if
it receives an invalid/multiple DNT, so if we want a specific kind
of error handling then we would have to specify it.

....Roy

Received on Friday, 24 August 2012 00:56:10 UTC