On Tue, 07 May 2013 01:39:26 +0200, Anne van Kesteren <ann...@annevk.nl>
wrote:
On Mon, May 6, 2013 at 4:33 PM, Julian Aubourg <j...@ubourg.net> wrote:
It seems strange the spec would require a case-sensitive value for
Content-Type in certain circumstances. Are these deviations from the
case-insensitiveness of the header really necessary ? Are they
beneficial for authors ?
"This is how the web is" rings like an 'argument from authority'. I'm
generally less concerned about those than I believe you are, but I think
Julien's questions here are important.
It seems to me they promote bad practice (case-sensitive testing of
Content-Type).
There's only two things that seem to work well over a long period of
time given multiple implementations and developers coding toward the
dominant implementation (this describes the web).
(maybe.)
1. Require the same from everyone.
So is there a concrete dominanant implementation that is case-sensitive?
Because requiring case-insensistive matching from everyone would seem to
meet your requirement above, in principle. And it might even be that with
good clear specifications and good test suites that the dominant
implementation reinforces a simpler path for authors.
Anything else is likely to lead some subset of developers to depend on
certain things they really should not depend on and will force
everyone to match the conventions of what they depend on
I know this has happened on the web for various cases. But it actually
depends on having a sufficiently non-conformant implementation be
sufficiently important to dominate (rather than be a known error case that
is commonly monkey-patched until in a decade or so it just evaporates). I
don't see any proof that it is *bound* to happen.
cheers
Chaals
--
Charles McCathie Nevile - Consultant (web standards) CTO Office, Yandex
cha...@yandex-team.ru Find more at http://yandex.com
