[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [fwd] Last Call: Critical Content MIME Parameter to Proposed Standard

2002-06-14 07:29:21

In <200206131222(_dot_)g5DCMmY00627(_at_)astro(_dot_)cs(_dot_)utk(_dot_)edu> 
Keith Moore <moore(_at_)cs(_dot_)utk(_dot_)edu> writes:

To me the real challenges are these:

- to discourage people from lifting a protocol extension from one protocol 
 and placing it in another without adequate regard for the differences
 in use cases between the two protocols

A good example is User-Agent, which we lifted from HTTP for use in Usefor.
It is similar enough that you are unlikely to notice the difference, but
they are there (e.g. HTTP has a different list of 'tspecials').

- to get people to understand that an extension named X in protocol A isn't
 necessarily the same as a similar extension named X in protocol B - 
 the semantics may be slightly different, they may evolve in different ways,
 different options and use cases may apply

Which is where Graham Klyne's IANA register of headers would be useful
(yes it has gone quiet, but I intend to get back to commenting on his
draft register RSN).

Charles H. Lindsey ---------At Home, doing my own thing------------------------
Tel: +44 161 436 6131 Fax: +44 161 436 6133   Web:
Email: chl(_at_)clw(_dot_)cs(_dot_)man(_dot_)ac(_dot_)uk      Snail: 5 
Clerewood Ave, CHEADLE, SK8 3JU, U.K.
PGP: 2C15F1A9      Fingerprint: 73 6D C2 51 93 A0 01 E7 65 E8 64 7E 14 A4 AB A5