On 17/09/2010 18:02, Christopher Schultz wrote: > Brian, > > On 9/17/2010 7:00 AM, Brian McBride wrote: >> My interpretation is still that 2109 defines the >> behaviour of Set-Cookie and 2965 that of Set-Cookie2 and that the intent >> was that Set-Cookie2 should obsolete Set-Cookie, i.e. 2109 still defines >> the behaviour of Set-Cookie. > > +1 > > That's the beauty of backward-compatibility, market inertia, and and the > never-ending string of RFCs you have to read to figure out just what the > hell is really going on. > >> I presume the behaviour of >> Set-Cookie2 is not backwards compatible with that of Set-Cookie and >> hence the introduction of a new header.
+1 p (I just wanted to add another 't' really)
0x62590808.asc
Description: application/pgp-keys
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
