- From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@yahoo-inc.com>
- Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2006 15:18:09 -0700
- To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- Cc: "Julian Reschke" <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, "Web APIs WG (public)" <public-webapi@w3.org>
Make it a SHOULD and twiddle your CR exit criteria to take it into account; in the long term, implementations will sort themselves out. The real danger here is that the WG will be tempted to use the API to profile other parts of HTTP for convenience, or based on current implementations, as well. Please, don't. I'd also note that Apache preserves the casing of HTTP method all the way through mod_cgi. Cheers, On 2006/04/20, at 2:45 PM, Anne van Kesteren wrote: > > On Thu, 20 Apr 2006 23:38:56 +0200, Julian Reschke > <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote: >> In the end, we want to have these clients/libraries fixed, right? > > I guess that's the question. Is it sensible to implement it as case- > sensitive knowing that you probably break content? (Such as the > examples in the specification...) Should we specify that methods > MUST be treated as case-sensitive knowing that we will than never > exit CR state given the way it has been implemented and will stay > implemented because of the content that's out there? Those type of > questions... > > > -- > Anne van Kesteren > <http://annevankesteren.nl/> > <http://www.opera.com/> -- Mark Nottingham mnot@yahoo-inc.com
Received on Thursday, 20 April 2006 22:18:36 UTC