Deprecating Use of the "X-" Prefix in Application Protocols (IETF Draft)

Re:Deprecating Use of the "X-" Prefix in Application Protoco... by lightblade on Wednesday February 01, 2012 @04:01PM (#3539899)

ok..so instead of x- ..what should we be using for none standard header?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Deprecating Use of the "X-" Prefix in Application Protoco... by ericwaller on Wednesday February 01, 2012 @04:03PM (#3539909)

From page 3 (http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-appsawg-xdash-02#page-...):

employ meaningful but currently unused names

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Deprecating Use of the "X-" Prefix in Application Protoco... by gojomo on Wednesday February 01, 2012 @10:00PM (#3541244)

My interpretation: Google for your intended usage; if it seems novel, good. Make sure you document so the next person who Googles for it sees you're already semantic-squatting on that name in context.

Not pretty for those who like certainty and formality, but very in tune with how things can work with global search.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Deprecating Use of the "X-" Prefix in Application Protoco... by nemetroid on Thursday February 02, 2012 @12:05AM (#3541513)

That is; the same way as before just without the X.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Deprecating Use of the "X-" Prefix in Application Protoco... by Karellen on Wednesday February 01, 2012 @07:01PM (#3540749)

"Note: If the relevant parameter name space has conventions about associating parameter names with those who create them, a parameter name could incorporate the organization's name or primary domain name"

"4. SHOULD identify a convention to allow local or implementation-specific extensions, and reserve delimeters for such uses as needed."

As has been mentioned by another commenter[0] these parts invite the drawing of parallels to CSS vendor prefixes.

e.g. -moz-/-ms-/etc...

[0] http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3540150

[ Parent | on HN ]