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

Re: NIT (squared): v11-spec-04.txt: 14.36 Range

From: <jg@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 04 Jun 96 16:11:23 -0400
Message-Id: <9606042011.AA12284@zorch.w3.org>
To: John Franks <john@math.nwu.edu>
Cc: Dave Kristol <dmk@allegra.att.com>, http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com
A reminder:

Please limit suggestions at this date to substantive changes; I'm going to be 
pretty draconian on nits in the next draft.  I do not want to take of introducing
new problems in the draft when fixing existing ones.  So rewrites, particularly
that add sentences that may cause interactions that did not exist before,
are likely to be frowned on by the editor this time around.

If we feel more wordsmithing is needed, we can do it between proposed
standard and draft standard.

As to the particular suggestion, it fails one test at least:

A famous individual once wrote (don't have my Bartlett's quotations
handy, so I won't have it right) something like:

'My apologies for such a long letter; I was too busy to write a short one.'

Shorter is usually (not always) better.  Fewer words to misinterpret.
				- Jim Gettys
Received on Tuesday, 4 June 1996 13:13:32 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 24 September 2003 06:32:02 EDT