IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [http-state] Goals for the UA conformance section

Daniel Stenberg <daniel@haxx.se> Tue, 18 August 2009 08:10 UTC

Return-Path: <daniel@haxx.se>
X-Original-To: http-state@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: http-state@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 41FB43A6801 for <http-state@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 18 Aug 2009 01:10:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.719
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.719 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.470, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_SE=0.35]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id utehVn0zSinS for <http-state@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 18 Aug 2009 01:10:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from kluster1.contactor.se (kluster1.contactor.se [91.191.140.11]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1171E3A6B5D for <http-state@ietf.org>; Tue, 18 Aug 2009 01:10:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from linux2.contactor.se (linux2.contactor.se [91.191.140.14]) by kluster1.contactor.se (8.13.8/8.13.8/Debian-3) with ESMTP id n7I7xP2A021669; Tue, 18 Aug 2009 09:59:25 +0200
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2009 09:59:25 +0200
From: Daniel Stenberg <daniel@haxx.se>
X-X-Sender: dast@linux2.contactor.se
To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
In-Reply-To: <op.uyuleibp64w2qv@anne-van-kesterens-macbook.local>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.00.0908180957150.17475@yvahk2.pbagnpgbe.fr>
References: <7789133a0908180027n644d8abcxc2327b6f2f6a475f@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.DEB.2.00.0908180929540.17475@yvahk2.pbagnpgbe.fr> <op.uyuleibp64w2qv@anne-van-kesterens-macbook.local>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (DEB 1167 2008-08-23)
X-fromdanielhimself: yes
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"
Cc: http-state <http-state@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [http-state] Goals for the UA conformance section
X-BeenThere: http-state@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discuss HTTP State Management Mechanism <http-state.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/http-state>, <mailto:http-state-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/http-state>
List-Post: <mailto:http-state@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:http-state-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/http-state>, <mailto:http-state-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2009 08:10:55 -0000

On Tue, 18 Aug 2009, Anne van Kesteren wrote:

> More concretely, if Opera disagrees with other implementations in some 
> detail I would very much prefer for this specification to indicate that 
> Opera is non-compliant and that we would be required to change something in 
> order to conform than that the behavior would be left undefined. And 
> watering such things down with a "SHOULD" would wrong in my opinion since 
> the intent is that every client does in fact implement that in the end.

Point taken.

I think that makes sense to a very large extent, and I could very well agree 
to work with that slightly modified focus. With such a mindset I agree that 
the sorting could very well be phrased as a MUST.

-- 

  / daniel.haxx.se

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email