[whatwg] X-UA-Compatible, X-* headers, validators, etc.

[Maciej Stachowiak]

On Oct 11, 2009, at 11:57 PM, Henri Sivonen wrote:

> On Oct 10, 2009, at 08:20, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
>
>> I think the HTML5 requirement should be changed to allow any header  
>> in the Permanent Message Header Field Registry. Effectively, this  
>> would require either an RFC or an Open Standard. This seems just as  
>> good for HTML5's purposes as requiring an RFC.
>
> I disagree unless we really want to enable http-equiv as a way of  
> specifying browser-only HTTP header equivalents that intermediaries  
> ignore.

Sorry, my statement was ambiguous. To be more specific:

"I think the HTML5 requirement should be changed to allow any header  
in the Permanent Message Header Field Registry to be registered as a  
pragma extension (instead of only headers defined by an RFC)."

I think this has no impact on your point of concern.

> OTOH, if we want to enable only pragmas that the HTML layer must  
> recognize for backwards-compatibility, enumerating the permitted  
> values is quite reasonable.

Are you suggesting that the pragma extensions registry should be  
removed entirely?

Regards,
Maciej