Re: Avoiding X-Headers

New Message Reply About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

From: Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz (Shmuel@acm.org)
Date: Fri Jan 11 2002 - 07:24:24 CST


In <Gpq11s.5AA@clw.cs.man.ac.uk>, on 01/10/2002
   at 11:53 AM, chl@clw.cs.man.ac.uk (Charles Lindsey) said:

>That would be to make them all 'variant' or 'local' or something, by
>definition. But why? They do no harm. Current practice is to generate
>them for all sorts of (most useless) purposes. People seem to like
>doing it. Let them do so.

I don't care whether X- headers are allowed to propogate in perpetuity
or are eventually dropped. Some others posters have objected to them,
and my concern is that *if* they are dropped it should be in a fashion
allowing for an orderly transition.

 

-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------
     Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
     Atid/2
     Team OS/2
     Team PL/I
-----------------------------------------------------------


New Message Reply About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view


This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29.