Answer by Edward Brey for Custom HTTP headers : naming conventions
RFC6648 recommends that you assume that your custom header "might become standardized, public, commonly deployed, or usable across multiple implementations." Therefore, it recommends not to prefix it...
View ArticleAnswer by cweekly for Custom HTTP headers : naming conventions
The question bears re-reading. The actual question asked is not similar to vendor prefixes in CSS properties, where future-proofing and thinking about vendor support and official standards is...
View ArticleAnswer by g1smd for Custom HTTP headers : naming conventions
Modifying, or more correctly, adding additional HTTP headers is a great code debugging tool if nothing else.When a URL request returns a redirect or an image there is no html "page" to temporarily...
View ArticleAnswer by Tom Anderson for Custom HTTP headers : naming conventions
The format for HTTP headers is defined in the HTTP specification. I'm going to talk about HTTP 1.1, for which the specification is RFC 2616. In section 4.2, 'Message Headers', the general structure of...
View ArticleAnswer by Julian Reschke for Custom HTTP headers : naming conventions
The header field name registry is defined in RFC3864, and there's nothing special with "X-".As far as I can tell, there are no guidelines for private headers; in doubt, avoid them. Or have a look at...
View ArticleAnswer by BalusC for Custom HTTP headers : naming conventions
The recommendation iswas to start their name with "X-". E.g. X-Forwarded-For, X-Requested-With. This is also mentioned in a.o. section 5 of RFC 2047.Update 1: On June 2011, the first IETF draft was...
View ArticleCustom HTTP headers : naming conventions
Several of our users have asked us to include data relative to their account in the HTTP headers of requests we send them, or even responses they get from our API.What is the general convention to add...
View Article