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

[Henri Sivonen]

On Oct 12, 2009, at 13:09, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:

> 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)."

OK. I misunderstood what you meant.

>> 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?


I'm not sure. I think it would be preferable to stay away from http- 
equiv, though.

-- 
Henri Sivonen
hsivonen at iki.fi
http://hsivonen.iki.fi/