[Top] [All Lists]

Re: X-* header fields

2004-01-25 16:50:25

--On 2004-1-22 5:08 PM -0800 ned+ietf-822(_at_)mrochek(_dot_)com wrote:

My own, primary concern about them is having an "experimental" header
become a defacto standard and then having to find a way to get folks
to use a new, non-X header name for it.  I believe that hasn't been
successful yet, or at least not much.

This is my major concern with them as well.

But how often has this even been tried? If there have been *serious* efforts to attempt this in the past it would be useful if someone could document in detail the process taken to make the change, and provide an analysis of why it failed.


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