Julian Reschke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Jonas Sicking wrote:
> > ...
> > If "*/*" is semantically the same as not sending the header at all, and 
> > the former works with more servers, I would prefer that we use the
> > ...
> I would prefer not to silently change what the client requested.

It's semantically equivalent - it does not change the request, in the same
way that adding the Connection header does not change the request.  It's not
like we're requiring that the UA add something that changes the meaning
(even though that's what some of the desktop browser vendors seem to be
doing anyway!)

> If a server can't cope with it (evidence, please!), fix it.

Some older versions of Microsoft IIS are the servers that I've come across
that fail to cope with it.  It is unrealistic to expect these to be
undeployed any time soon.  The comment in my code does not specify version
numbers - it simply indicates that a lack of an Accept header causes some
versions of IIS to return a None Match error.  On that basis, and because
sending "Accept: */*" fixes the problem, I am assuming that the fault lies
in the content negotation code.

Stewart Brodie
Software Engineer
ANT Software Limited

Reply via email to