ACTION-211: Draft discussion of x- tokens and squatting for self-describing web finding, if review shows it's not already there
Draft discussion of x- tokens and squatting for self-describing web finding, if review shows it's not already there
- State:
- closed
- Person:
- Dan Connolly
- Due on:
- January 22, 2009
- Created on:
- January 7, 2009
- Associated Issue:
- selfDescribingWeb-51
- Related emails:
- Approved minutes of TAG Teleconference of 22 January 2009 (from noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com on 2009-02-17)
- Re: Draft Telcon Agenda for 22nd January 2009: siteData-36; selfDescribingWeb-51; WebApps Requirements; errorHandling-20 (from noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com on 2009-01-20)
- Draft Telcon Agenda for 22nd January 2009: siteData-36; selfDescribingWeb-51; WebApps Requirements; errorHandling-20 (from skw@hp.com on 2009-01-20)
- Minutes from Jan 15, 2009 Telcon (from ashok.malhotra@oracle.com on 2009-01-16)
- TAG Teleconference Agenda for 15 January 2009 (from noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com on 2009-01-14)
- Draft TAG Agenda fro 15th Jan. (from skw@hp.com on 2009-01-13)
- TAG Minutes for 8 Jan 2009 (from ndw@nwalsh.com on 2009-01-13)
Related notes:
x- tokens are used in an example of something not to do; maybe that's enough.
But the way x-www-urlencoded got widely deployed isn't discussed.
I wonder what the IETF current thinking on X- tokens is; there are none in the Atom spec. http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4287
Perhaps move reference to issue 51 from the body to the status section
"Similarly, the need may arise to use new values for individual fields such as rel attributes on HTML link elements (see [TAGIssue51]). "
kinda withdrawn last week, but I'm thinking about a blog post or something, so keeping it for now...
Dan Connolly, 26 Jan 2009, 17:27:47Display change log.