[whatwg] X-UA-Compatible, X-* headers, validators, etc.

On Oct 9, 2009, at 11:21 AM, Julian Reschke wrote:
> True, but there is no real "X-" prefix convention for HTTP headers.
> But, there is a registration procedure, defined in RFC 3864. It  
> defines two registries, a provisional, and a permanent. The latter  
> (and only that) requires:
>   Registration of a new message header field starts with construction
>   of a proposal that describes the syntax, semantics and intended use
>   of the field.  For entries in the Permanent Message Header Field
>   Registry, this proposal MUST be published as an RFC, or as an Open
>   Standard in the sense described by RFC 2026, section 7 [1].
> (<http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3864#section-4.1>)
> The HTML5 requirement goes further than the IETF requirement; I  
> would consider that a bug.

I think the HTML5 requirement should be changed to allow any header in  
the Permanent Message Header Field Registry. Effectively, this would  
require either an RFC or an Open Standard. This seems just as good for  
HTML5's purposes as requiring an RFC.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/attachments/20091009/2701fbd8/attachment.htm>

Received on Friday, 9 October 2009 22:20:58 UTC