See also http://www.hixie.ch/tests/adhoc/http/link/007.html http://www.hixie.ch/tests/adhoc/http/link/008.html Basically, we are parsing things that aren't really Link headers as Link headers.

Furthermore, it appears that Firefox ignores the "anchor" parameter (see http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2068#section-19.6.2.4). What it should do is resolve the anchor (when given) against the request-uri, and only continue processing it if the resolved URI identifies the same resource.

> What it should do is resolve the anchor (when given) against the request-uri, > and only continue processing it if the resolved URI identifies the same > resource. Of course the RFC doesn't actually say any of that. I'm quite happy to implement what it does say, if I could figure out what that is; it says how the field MAY be used, but not how one MUST process it (or heck, SHOULD or MAY process, for that matter; processing is completely undefined). In any case, that should probably be a separate bug.

(In reply to comment #2) > > What it should do is resolve the anchor (when given) against the request-uri, > > and only continue processing it if the resolved URI identifies the same > > resource. > > Of course the RFC doesn't actually say any of that. I'm quite happy to > implement what it does say, if I could figure out what that is; it says how the > field MAY be used, but not how one MUST process it (or heck, SHOULD or MAY > process, for that matter; processing is completely undefined). > > In any case, that should probably be a separate bug. 1) Just because there's no SHOULD or MUST there doesn't mean it's normative. That being said I agree that RFC 2068 is not very clear about it, and hopefully draft-nottingham-http-link-header can be made clearer. 2) Will open a new bug.

(In reply to comment #0) > See also > > http://www.hixie.ch/tests/adhoc/http/link/007.html "my" test: http://greenbytes.de/tech/tc/httplink/#simplecssreversed Opera passes here so I think FF should align. I will work on this. > http://www.hixie.ch/tests/adhoc/http/link/008.html I believe this will be fixed once the fix for bug 672079 is in. > Basically, we are parsing things that aren't really Link headers as Link > headers.

> ... > > http://www.hixie.ch/tests/adhoc/http/link/008.html > > I believe this will be fixed once the fix for bug 672079 is in. > ... Is is. (So what's left to fix for this bug are http://www.hixie.ch/tests/adhoc/http/link/007.html http://greenbytes.de/tech/tc/httplink/#simplecssreversed )

This changes the header field parser so that the <target> is only accepted when coming first (this is required by the ABNF and actually enforced in Opera). This fixes http://greenbytes.de/tech/tc/httplink/#simplecssreversed and http://www.hixie.ch/tests/adhoc/http/link/007.html (where http://www.hixie.ch/tests/adhoc/http/link/008.html is already fixed)

Comment on attachment 550366 [details] [diff] [review] proposed patch r=me