- From: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
- Date: Fri, 30 Dec 2011 13:01:06 -0500
- To: public-xg-webid@w3.org
- Message-ID: <4EFDFC62.10207@openlinksw.com>
On 12/29/11 10:34 PM, Peter Williams wrote: > (b) I have yet to make windows IIS server deliver a stream for a GET > for URI with fragment on the wire, whether required or not for this > protocol. Being fair to Microsoft, they do what the HTTP RFC says they > should. But, the HTTP is indeed a SHOULD not a MUST, and thus it is > not wholly improper to do what Henry's server does. The question is: > IS IT NECESSARY, HERE FOR THIS (and only this) PROTOCOL Don't send the Fragment Identifier over the wire. Server's dealing with the Fragment Identifier in an HTTP GET request is an anti pattern . This bias is basically a WWW best practice :-) -- Regards, Kingsley Idehen Founder& CEO OpenLink Software Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen Twitter/Identi.ca handle: @kidehen Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/112399767740508618350/about LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen
Attachments
- application/pkcs7-signature attachment: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Received on Friday, 30 December 2011 18:01:29 UTC