W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg-old@w3.org > May to August 1996

Re: v11-03 COMMENT: 16.1 Semantic Transparency

From: Jeffrey Mogul <mogul@pa.dec.com>
Date: Tue, 14 May 96 15:20:54 MDT
Message-Id: <9605142220.AA14154@acetes.pa.dec.com>
To: Dave Kristol <dmk@allegra.att.com>
Cc: http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com
    Can we eliminate the double negatives in the first bullet list?
    Proposed new wording:
    
    ... the protocol requires that transparency may be relaxed only if
    
    + there is an explicit protocol-level request (when relaxed by client or
	    origin server)
    + there is a way to warn the end user (when relaxed by cache or client)
    
That's a reasonable suggestion.  I'd reword it slightly, 

    ... the protocol requires that transparency may be relaxed only

  .  by an explicit protocol-level request (when relaxed by client
     or origin server)
  .  and with an explicit warning to the end user (when relaxed by
     cache or client)

-Jeff
Received on Tuesday, 14 May 1996 15:30:20 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 24 September 2003 06:31:59 EDT