IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [http-state] Goals for the UA conformance section (was Re: Updated draft)

Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> Wed, 19 August 2009 06:06 UTC

Return-Path: <ian@hixie.ch>
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 27B833A6944 for <http-state@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 18 Aug 2009 23:06:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.199
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.199 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.600, BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 ZEwY3egDKAKc for <http-state@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 18 Aug 2009 23:06:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from looneymail-a2.g.dreamhost.com (caibbdcaaaaf.dreamhost.com [208.113.200.5]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4FA813A68F4 for <http-state@ietf.org>; Tue, 18 Aug 2009 23:06:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from hixie.dreamhostps.com (hixie.dreamhost.com [208.113.210.27]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by looneymail-a2.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9AB2416D42F; Tue, 18 Aug 2009 23:02:42 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2009 06:02:45 +0000
From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
To: Daniel Stenberg <daniel@haxx.se>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.00.0908180929540.17475@yvahk2.pbagnpgbe.fr>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.62.0908190553060.31215@hixie.dreamhostps.com>
References: <7789133a0908180027n644d8abcxc2327b6f2f6a475f@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.DEB.2.00.0908180929540.17475@yvahk2.pbagnpgbe.fr>
Content-Language: en-GB-hixie
Content-Style-Type: text/css
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset="US-ASCII"
Cc: http-state <http-state@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [http-state] Goals for the UA conformance section (was Re: Updated draft)
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: Wed, 19 Aug 2009 06:06:38 -0000

On Tue, 18 Aug 2009, Daniel Stenberg wrote:
> 
> Internet Explorer, Firefox, Safari, Chrome, and Opera are all web 
> browsers. Those five pretty much represent 99.99% of the user market. 
> (exact numbers don't matter)
> 
> HTTP and cookies are however not reserved for web browsers. Lots and 
> lots of applications are written to automate things, to run backends or 
> whatever and they too use HTTP and cookies. They typically use _other_ 
> HTTP implementations.

FWIW, when I write tools that use cookies, I'd like them to do the same as 
the Web browsers.

In general, specs should be specific about what the output should be. We 
shouldn't leave things undefined or up to the implementation if it affects 
other implementations (such as servers), because otherwise we will find 
authors end up relying on the market leader's behaviour. So we have to 
define the sort order whatever we do. It makes sense to pick the sort 
order used by the browsers, IMHO.

-- 
Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email