And then Piero says:
> NO !
> Please note this is a X-Header, so its use is free under all RFCs.
> Nobody can rely upon it.
Rhys and Piero are talking about apples and oranges. Piero is taking a
legalistic point of view, whereas Rhys is speaking practical terms. The
practical will win out over the legal.
Piero also says:
> It *does* matter. I couldn't care less of users misinterpreting
> this header.
Do you really mean that? You really don't care if a user misinterprets? What
happened to the last two decades of increasing focus on the end user and
improvements in user interfaces? These are not just technical issues but
human issues, psychological issues.
It's one thing to add technical information that the average user doesn't care
about and doesn't need to ever see. The Path header is usually hidden. A user
who actually sees it may not understand it but probably will not place a
misinterpretation on it. The problem with X-Copyright is that users must
understand it yet it is subject to misinterpretation -- by *humans*. Humans
are the only important element of the net. The machines, ultimately, don't
matter.
-- Edward Reid ed@titipu.resun.com (normal) PO Box 378 Edward_Reid@acm.org (forwarding) Greensboro FL reide@freenet.fsu.edu (seldom checked)
[
Usenet Hypertext FAQ Archive |
Search Mail Archive |
Authors |
Usenet
]
[
1993 |
1994 |
1995 |
1996 |
1997
]
© Copyright The Landfield Group, 1997
All rights reserved