Re: [whatwg/fetch] Add support for compression dictionary transport (PR #1854)

@fred-wang commented on this pull request.



> @@ -6531,12 +6559,126 @@ run these steps:
  <li><p>If <var>isAuthenticationFetch</var> is true, then create an <a>authentication entry</a> for
  <var>request</var> and the given realm.
 
+ <li>
+  <p>If <var>request</var>'s <a for=request>response tainting</a> is not "<code>opaque</code>"
+  and <var>response</var>'s <a for=response>header list</a> <a for="header list">contains</a>
+  `<code>Use-As-Dictionary</code>`:
+  <!-- This is defined in [[!RFC9842]] -->
+
+  <ol>
+   <li><p>Let <var>dictionaryValue</var> be the result of
+   <a for="header list">getting a structured field value</a> given `<code>Use-As-Dictionary</code>`,
+   "<code>dictionary</code>", and <var>response</var>'s <a for=response>header list</a>.
+
+   <li><p>If <var>dictionaryValue</var> is null or <var>dictionaryValue</var>["<code>match</code>"]
+   does not <a for=map>exist</a>, then return <var>response</var>.

Yeah, I was not sure what is the common way to handle this, however https://httpwg.org/specs/rfc9651.html#preserving-extensibility mentions this:

> Specifications that use Dictionaries can also allow for forward compatibility by requiring that the presence of -- as well as value and type associated with -- unknown keys be ignored. Subsequent specifications can then add additional keys, specifying constraints on them as appropriate.

So maybe the spec should be explicit about ignoring unknown keys.

Incidentally, https://httpwg.org/specs/rfc9651.html#error-handling says ignoring the entire field is the default behavior when field-specific constraints are violated so it's indeed good the spec is now explicit for id, type, etc that we only ignore the corresponding key.

(note: probably rfc9651 should also have similar wording)

-- 
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/whatwg/fetch/pull/1854#discussion_r3308333845
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.

Message ID: <whatwg/fetch/pull/1854/review/4369277960@github.com>