[Top] [All Lists]

Re: X-* header fields

2004-01-23 04:30:49

At 01:21 23/01/2004, you wrote:

A clean, simple, fast way to register the non X- header field would do the

Almost certainly, yes.

The primary reason "good idea" header fields don't get made into standards is probably that people can't register them. Trying to get a standard approved seems to be a long, arduous task, with lots of heads meeting lots of walls.

There are quite a few non-standard headers (X- ones as well as non-X- ones) out there which seem to be good ideas to some people - but maybe not everyone agrees (eg Delivered-To, Priority, X-RCPTTO etc). I'd actually bet that trying to get those through to be standards would be a nightmare, even though it'd be nice for many people if they were standards (without the X- in the case of X-RCPTTO), so, people use them, and try to guess what they should mean, and how they should be used. I've seen many different ways that all those headers are used.

This doesn't argue against X- headers. It just argues against having useful non-standard headers. One way to solve the problem is to stop people using them. The other (better, IMHO) way is to make it easier for people to make them into standard headers. If people are trying to use non-standard headers they're not creating themselves, then it means they're useful (otherwise people wouldn't be trying to use them)...

Paul                            VPOP3 - Internet Email Server/Gateway

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>