ACTION-49: Prompt Ian Hickson to answer the question about why the sniffing rules are a MUST
Prompt Ian Hickson to answer the question about why the sniffing rules are a MUST
- Dan Connolly
- Due on:
- February 8, 2008
- Created on:
- February 7, 2008
- Related emails:
- No related emails
[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.
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.
Created action 'Prompt Ian Hickson to answer the question about why the sniffing rules are a MUST' assigned to Dan Connolly, due 2008-02-147 Feb 2008, 17:27:45
Due date changed to 2008-02-15Dan Connolly, 7 Feb 2008, 18:04:55
Due date changed to 2008-02-08Dan Connolly, 7 Feb 2008, 18:05:33
Status changed to 'pending review'Dan Connolly, 14 Feb 2008, 21:17:52
Status changed to 'closed'Chris Wilson, 15 Feb 2008, 00:19:53