>> Now IMHO, the use of X- in X-Face shouldn't prevent us from
>> X-Face in an RFC, nor even from making it a standard - but only if we
>> really had consensus to choose that name and format.
> And there's actually a much nicer and more modern Face header
> specification that would be more suitable for standardization. I think
> X-Face is really more of an informational RFC at this point, not a
> direction we'd want to move towards going forward.
I guess I'm still looking for that canonical example of a read-write X-
field that really, really should be standardized as-is. Or maybe I've
X-Accept-Language comes very close IMO.