Reference/register the webhook- HTTP header fields
#107
Comments
|
Not at the moment, but it sounds like a great idea. Thanks for the suggestion! |
|
On https://webconcepts.info/concepts/http-header/ I have a collection of standardized and other well-known header fields. I guess I could add the three fields from the spec and add the spec as the definition, right? |
|
Also, if you need input/help with defining the fields in a slightly more IANA-friendly way, please let me know. I like standards. |
|
Yeah, both things would be great. Both adding it to the list, and defining them in a more IANA-friendly way. |
|
On 2024-01-26 19:47, Tom Hacohen wrote:
Yeah, both things would be great. Both adding it to the list, and defining them in a more IANA-friendly way.
here"s a first version: https://webconcepts.info/specs/Webhook/standard/webhooks
it would be really useful if each of the header fields would have a complete description of what it"s doing. the current descriptions are rather minimal and i don"t just want to make things up.
|
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
I am wondering: Are the
webhook-HTTP header fields defined somewhere? If so it would be great to reference that definition. If not it might make sense to consider defining these and then adding them to the IANA registry of HTTP header fields.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: