Joshua Cranmer writes: > On 10/24/2011 8:04 PM, Barry Warsaw wrote: > > On Oct 13, 2011, at 11:41 PM, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
> >> There's movement afoot to deprecate use of "X-" in header field > >> names. Just call it "Mailman-Topic". And if it's worthwhile, > >> consider registering it with IANA. > > > > I wonder if we should remove the X- prefixes for Mailman 3. > > Here's a list of ones we still add or recognize (some might be > > used only in the test suite): I would say that anything that is used only in the test suite should still get an X-, although I suppose you could use Mailman-Test- too. > I believe the rule of thumb is you're supposed to use the X- prefix if > it's not registered, so until the header is registered at IANA, I would > vote that the X- prefix stays retained. What Murray is saying is that the rule of thumb is changing in response to experience. What has happened is that the experience with promoting an X-Foo header to just Foo has been poor, and the attendant confusion often hinders adoption. So many people have been in the habit of ignoring the X- namespace anyway (the most widespread example I know of is the adoption of Mail-Followup-To in mail, which has no[1] sanction in the RFCs, although it's a long-standard header in news). Footnotes: [1] Last I checked, anyway, a couple years ago, but widespread usage dates back to at least 2003. _______________________________________________ Mailman-Developers mailing list Mailman-Developers@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-developers Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3 Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-developers%40python.org/ Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-developers/archive%40jab.org Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
