Rainer Jung wrote: > the old spec states "The Reason-Phrase is intended to give a short textual > description of the Status-Code. > The ... Reason-Phrase is intended for the human user."
"human user" should be a pretty big clue that a UA should not be using it to make any decisions. Any UA that made decisions based on this field is totally broken. It doesn't say "Reason-Phrase is intended for the UA". As someone who is currently working on dragging clients into the future, and who has seen all the cruft the web has accumulated because we've tried to be nice to broken clients, I'm happy when servers break clients and force them to upgrade. On average if those clients got this wrong, they probably are also sufficiently old as to have security vulnerabilities and should be updated (or replaced) anyway. That said, this isn't an advocacy list, and I've already expressed my preference. But wearing a Spec hat, and wearing a W3C hat, and wearing a hat as someone who proofreads RFCs, the UA in question is in the wrong. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org
