IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Working Group Last Call: Structured Headers for HTTP

Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> Tue, 25 February 2020 06:18 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf-http-wg-request+bounce-httpbisa-archive-bis2juki=lists.ie@listhub.w3.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D7FB3A0404 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 24 Feb 2020 22:18:02 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.75
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.75 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=mnot.net header.b=aAzAZ8j8; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=M9tzxAdf
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id cO_rRpiSy9Fq for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 24 Feb 2020 22:18:00 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lyra.w3.org (lyra.w3.org [128.30.52.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7232D3A0403 for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Mon, 24 Feb 2020 22:18:00 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lists by lyra.w3.org with local (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1j6TU3-0001fb-AG for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Tue, 25 Feb 2020 06:14:19 +0000
Resent-Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2020 06:14:19 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1j6TU3-0001fb-AG@lyra.w3.org>
Received: from titan.w3.org ([128.30.52.76]) by lyra.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from <mnot@mnot.net>) id 1j6TTw-0001eq-QI for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Tue, 25 Feb 2020 06:14:12 +0000
Received: from wout3-smtp.messagingengine.com ([64.147.123.19]) by titan.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from <mnot@mnot.net>) id 1j6TTu-0002Ze-Ih for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Tue, 25 Feb 2020 06:14:12 +0000
Received: from compute3.internal (compute3.nyi.internal [10.202.2.43]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0FE4A974; Tue, 25 Feb 2020 01:13:55 -0500 (EST)
Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute3.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 25 Feb 2020 01:13:56 -0500
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mnot.net; h= content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; s=fm2; bh=Y jVmnVoL0pBvc3II8qSfB33x9hlvHuwjh8XVXtRORN4=; b=aAzAZ8j81suzQ1YDs Cjow+J8ELaHJ12p/SelcHR75uWrcRt4/2Q9GdsOg9IP6SS1uhpejDDkE4sG1vfkK Bxj8PHC9p1LLQh0USC61wEfQFZ87iBkFaiimNDBU1kjfLqsTw8MXYdUHt8NtlQBf ZBr0yuC6QUvvN7YgCMDxIU8ZaxXzdsBrS4dBsv+8l7QkSOnhy8AoUi+Wayi00L3l kdeSCAW02Q9gXV4aXp1oZTuFzCUHCWsyd0OG4sOUEoZsDA2wJN9rAoIYbWCYAMN4 mtp+8D2PrPRn6MqtkXuZWN+qMPOGeRPk4rh1x1CQXcC97kVkQV4IKyLlt+yvd3Ox 4dSkA==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=YjVmnVoL0pBvc3II8qSfB33x9hlvHuwjh8XVXtROR N4=; b=M9tzxAdfokrTQ79N1a3bjixxh5jtQaiAwNAR4d9iIaoj+GovVJ4vDfA1B +YPQQBKWnZvoK4twheGvxvUQFm3YS8mqjdBG7FLJcvxICpmk2kwgbS052PFeY80l 72UskHqN7EM1aActzdci5W54Y6woU5hyzpjL3QZ4TML2wSZ80AWzzM40Vmgx9v3i IQGbIRuonP4pWmlQRbEYfmN4fgu2WEJcAp1sTazGeHWacBKlOp8h3cmQpR9V83uw gntN2XYiEPYqGE6XZJJ/UcR+V9XTEat2PNAZ/qai8jv11B0HcPGtvhVBX+5A7P18 S3WT+oZpwbcpLzwvrEkT6vlMYheYw==
X-ME-Sender: <xms:IrtUXiCaiaC9z-4uuyqfVRpJCyjwDcz8arYjNDpK8wWFQb9RT6yVQA>
X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedugedrledugdelvdcutefuodetggdotefrodftvf curfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecu uegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenuc fjughrpegtggfuhfgjfffgkfhfvffosehtqhhmtdhhtddvnecuhfhrohhmpeforghrkhcu pfhothhtihhnghhhrghmuceomhhnohhtsehmnhhothdrnhgvtheqnecuffhomhgrihhnpe hmnhhothdrnhgvthenucfkphepudduledrudejrdduheekrddvhedunecuvehluhhsthgv rhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepmhhnohhtsehmnhhothdrnh gvth
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:IrtUXk7fvdBkUS2xiXXkoYzWiU3kIewrX7NaIlW_gIoQY02K53uHmA> <xmx:IrtUXhpe7vNm_UCwc0HjJd_MrtMd0Auir8c02Xmq3sqBPKovK_AJyw> <xmx:IrtUXmM-b_AP-vaTWF8rKccgGdDg93SHR_MCDPzeUvTtixZg9APtfg> <xmx:I7tUXoX2UF67u0U6r9jegh6pBHCnRwrT3TXlMY40oIQkReyWXBZgUQ>
Received: from macbook-pro.mnot.net (unknown [119.17.158.251]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 3E5A33280060; Tue, 25 Feb 2020 01:13:52 -0500 (EST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.0 \(3608.60.0.2.5\))
From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
In-Reply-To: <25ce5f62-a7a0-d60f-bb3b-ccdfc39ab44e@gmx.de>
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2020 17:13:49 +1100
Cc: Tommy Pauly <tpauly@apple.com>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <D8146003-4572-494F-9C9F-A45D534BAE8C@mnot.net>
References: <C295C393-9602-4D41-9071-30629605E349@apple.com> <1a733857-e621-2ace-ad9a-1e3d872acf25@gmx.de> <3B46D138-971F-4602-8E54-4EE903EA5F24@mnot.net> <5b050bce-4740-4d48-60d5-3ee5678326a9@gmx.de> <F9777B9B-2D5E-4A29-A6D4-F6273437057D@mnot.net> <25ce5f62-a7a0-d60f-bb3b-ccdfc39ab44e@gmx.de>
To: "Julian F. Reschke" <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.60.0.2.5)
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=64.147.123.19; envelope-from=mnot@mnot.net; helo=wout3-smtp.messagingengine.com
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.8
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, W3C_AA=-1, W3C_DB=-1, W3C_IRA=-1, W3C_IRR=-3, W3C_WL=-1
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: titan.w3.org 1j6TTu-0002Ze-Ih 9f3d7ad1bf5f3d8342bc2a9b7dbf8969
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: Working Group Last Call: Structured Headers for HTTP
Archived-At: <https://www.w3.org/mid/D8146003-4572-494F-9C9F-A45D534BAE8C@mnot.net>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/37387
X-Loop: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Resent-Sender: ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org
Precedence: list
List-Id: <ietf-http-wg.w3.org>
List-Help: <https://www.w3.org/Mail/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org?subject=unsubscribe>


> On 25 Feb 2020, at 5:08 pm, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote:
> 
> I understand that. What trips me up is that we we have to different
> cases: one in which the shorter notation MUST be used, one in which it
> MUST NOT be used. Am I the only one who thinks that this is sub-optimal?
> 
> In a perfect world, the serialization should not depend on the context
> it appears in. I understand that this is a trade-off, but it would be
> good to see more context about how we got there, and whether
> alternatives were discussed.

If you're referring to the case of a Boolean as a Dictionary value (and it would be good if you confirmed that this is what you had in mind; if you're talking about Booleans wherever they might appear, I don't know how that would work), it was considered, but IIRC it would have required a substantially more complicated parsing algorithm, because of cases like this:

Example-Field: ;param=on-default-boolean

Parameter values are comparatively simpler, because they can't have any further substructure.

Cheers,


--
Mark Nottingham   https://www.mnot.net/

v2.29.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status