At 19:17 06/04/04, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
>
>Quoting James Holderness <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>>> If `Content-Location` is not usable or can't be used consistent on a website
>>> (for example, using it for both Atom and HTML content) I suggest we specify
>>> something that is consistent with what browsers do. And perhaps try to
obsolete the relevant header if possible...
>>
>> Isn't this something the HTTP WG should be doing?
Just for the record, there is currently no HTTP WG. The mailing
list of the former HTTP WG still exists. As this was an IETF WG,
and is an IETF mailing list (hosted by W3C), you can easily join
and bring this issue up. Here's the necessary data:
List-Id: <ietf-http-wg.w3.org>
List-Help: <http://www.w3.org/Mail/>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Resent-Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Resent-Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Regards, Martin.
>I guess so. The HTML WG (W3C, same concept) should be doing a lot of things as
>well. That doesn't mean it actually happens...
>
>
>--
>Anne van Kesteren
><http://annevankesteren.nl/>
>
