-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 10/23/12 4:39 PM, Yoav Nir wrote:

> This is to initiate WGLC for the X-Frame-Options draft

Lacking time for a thorough review, I'll provide only a few small
suggestions (take them or leave them as you will)...

Abstract

"this standard defines" => "this document defines"

Introduction

OLD
This draft is to document the current use of X-Frame-Options header
and shall in the future be replaced by the Frame-Options
[FRAME-OPTIONS] standard.

NEW
This specification provides informational documentation about the
current definition and use of the X-Frame-Options header.  Given that
the "X-" construction is deprecated [RFC6648], the X-Frame-Options
header will in the future be replaced by the Frame-Options
[FRAME-OPTIONS] header.

[note: I'm not sure if the migration from X-Frame-Options to
Frame-Options is really motivated by the considerations in RFC 6648,
thus you might not want to include the first clause of the second
sentence above]

IANA Considerations

Does this header really belong in the permanent registry, given that
there are already plans to deprecate it?

Peter

- -- 
Peter Saint-Andre
https://stpeter.im/


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.18 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://www.enigmail.net/

iEYEARECAAYFAlCj1WoACgkQNL8k5A2w/vyW7wCg7HyBtBin75GMTLNdcbrzmN8F
9AkAnRr82AN+gGg/KwVLj5EQ8pqeVLJW
=r3Hk
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
websec mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/websec

Reply via email to