Edit ACTION-49: Prompt Ian Hickson to answer the question about why the sniffing rules are a MUST




Due Date:

(accepts formats such as "2005-05-17", "+1 week", "14 August 2005" and "next Thursday")

Associated Issue:

Or Associated Product:

Add notes (no markup allowed, URIs get automatically hyperlinked):

No related emails.

Related notes:

[13:39] <DanC_lap> hixie? did you see a question about why the sniffing rules are a MUST?
[13:41] <DanC_lap> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2008Jan/0214.html Mark Baker asking "what is accomplished by making it normative exactly?"
[13:42] <DanC_lap> JR cites that in his investigation in collaboration with the IETF HTTP WG http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2008Feb/0099.html
[15:14] <Hixie> DanC_lap: yeah, i thought maciej and boris had answered that satisfactorily so i figured i'd rather not add to the noise (e.g. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2008Jan/0264.html )
[15:16] <DanC_lap> ah, well, an answer from the editor is different. but now I have one; thanks.

Dan Connolly, 14 Feb 2008, 21:17:44

Turns out that the final answer to this was: it doesn't need to be a MUST, so it is now compliant behaviour not to do sniffing, and to trust the metadata.

See <http://html5.org/tools/web-apps-tracker?from=1225&to=1226>.

Julian Reschke, 15 Feb 2008, 09:58:32

Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, Chairs, Michael[tm] Smith <mike@w3.org>, Staff Contact
Tracker: documentation, (configuration for this group), originally developed by Dean Jackson, is developed and maintained by the Systems Team <w3t-sys@w3.org>.
$Id: index.php,v 1.325 2014-09-10 21:42:02 ted Exp $