-------- In message <4859a11f-5649-b633-f43b-facf036e61c7@xxxxxx>, Julian Reschke writes : >Related to this: it just occurred to me that: > > Test: Foo > Test: > Test: Bar > >yields different results for fields using HTTP's list notation, and >structured header fields. > >In the former case, the combined value is equivalent to > > Test: Foo, Bar > >while in the latter case, the field is malformed. > >I *really* think it would be better if structured header fields would >actually be "proper" applications of the standard HTTP list ABNF. Considering how rarely used multiple-headers are (apart from The Cookie Mistake) I think it would be much simpler, better and wiser to restrict SH to single, non-concatenated headers. Ufortunately, that also runs up against the fact that we cannot possibly know if the header we got was joined by an unwitting intermediary. -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 phk@xxxxxxxxxxx | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence. -- last-call mailing list last-call@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call
