- From: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
- Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2009 10:35:25 +0300
On Oct 12, 2009, at 13:09, Maciej Stachowiak wrote: > On Oct 11, 2009, at 11:57 PM, Henri Sivonen wrote: > >> On Oct 10, 2009, at 08:20, Maciej Stachowiak wrote: >> >>> 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. >> >> I disagree unless we really want to enable http-equiv as a way of >> specifying browser-only HTTP header equivalents that intermediaries >> ignore. > > Sorry, my statement was ambiguous. To be more specific: > > "I think the HTML5 requirement should be changed to allow any header > in the Permanent Message Header Field Registry to be registered as a > pragma extension (instead of only headers defined by an RFC)." OK. I misunderstood what you meant. >> OTOH, if we want to enable only pragmas that the HTML layer must >> recognize for backwards-compatibility, enumerating the permitted >> values is quite reasonable. > > Are you suggesting that the pragma extensions registry should be > removed entirely? I'm not sure. I think it would be preferable to stay away from http- equiv, though. -- Henri Sivonen hsivonen at iki.fi http://hsivonen.iki.fi/
Received on Tuesday, 20 October 2009 00:35:25 UTC