On 30 Jan 2014, at 0:15, Florian Bösch <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
Right, it does imply that. But the vendor picked an imaginary version in this case, so I don't think we can do anything about it. The best way forward is to specify what an implementation should do when they implement a real spec.
We also have to be careful that this information doesn't become a UA-like string. i.e used for feature detection. That's why I think it should be specified - so that we all implement it the same way.