- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2008 21:24:35 +0100
- To: "Hallvord R. M. Steen" <hallvord@opera.com>
- CC: Alexey Proskuryakov <ap@webkit.org>, "Web API WG (public)" <public-webapi@w3.org>
Hallvord R. M. Steen wrote: > Pardon, perhaps because I have not done much spec development I don't understand > the logic of that statement. > > Since RFC 2616 says header names are case insensitive, it follows that > 'X-Custom-Header' and 'x-custom-header' are both valid by RFC 2616, and both > are the same header. So how would we contradict 2616 by telling implementors > not to change the case of script authors' input? The XHR implementation may sit on top of an HTTP stack that normalizes header names, for instance to camelCase. > What would contradict 2616 is to send different headers where names only differ > in case, as in such a request: > > GET / > X-Custom-Header: foo > X-custom-header: bar Actually, that wouldn't contradict HTTP because it allows headers to recur. > and my suggested spec change takes this into account by making name comparisons > more explicitly case-insensitive. It may make it harder to implement on certain platforms, for no apparent benefit. The server needs to check the header names case-insensitively anyway, so what difference does it make? > ... BR, Julian
Received on Tuesday, 12 February 2008 20:24:59 UTC