- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Sat, 10 Mar 2012 21:36:19 +0000
- To: public-webapps-bugzilla@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=16302 --- Comment #7 from Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> 2012-03-10 21:36:18 UTC --- (In reply to comment #6) > (In reply to comment #5) > > (In reply to comment #4) > > > ... > > > good point; we apparently need a specification of the canonical form of an > > > Internet media type to refer to in order to obtain a consistent serialization; > > > > Why do we need a consistent serialization? > > it sounds like you are asking why consistency is useful... isn't that the point > of having standards? or is the point to enshrine inconsistency? i prefer the > former, and i would guess that is why many of us are here, yes? Right now we have no canonical forms for any headers. Yes, having them might be useful in some cases (like signing messages), but defining them is a lot of work, and AFAIK nobody has done it yet. The fact that each new header field would need to define it's canonical form individually doesn't help. In the IETF, work happens if people volunteer and write a spec that other can review. I don't think anybody has done that yet, but maybe it's something you want to try? -- Configure bugmail: https://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 Saturday, 10 March 2012 21:36:22 UTC