W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg-old@w3.org > May to August 1998

Fwd: A suggestion for correction on HTTP/1.1 draft

From: Jim Gettys <jg@pa.dec.com>
Date: Mon, 6 Jul 1998 09:22:55 -0700
Message-Id: <9807061622.AA10509@pachyderm.pa.dec.com>
To: http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com

For some reason, Ravi had trouble posting this.
			- Jim

attached mail follows:


Hi Jim,
I tried sending the attached email to the 'http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com' as
suggested in the HTTP/1.1 Internet-Draft, but it came back with a
'connection timed out' error. Since you are one of the primary authors for
this draft, I thought I could forward it to you.
Thanks,
Ravi Badrachalam
Andersen Consulting
(Embedded image moved to file: PIC07364.PCX)
Ravi Badrachalam
07/03/98 03:48 PM

To:   http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com
cc:
Subject:  A suggestion for correction on HTTP/1.1 draft

While browsing through your HTTP Internet-Draft "
draft-ietf-http-v11-spec-rev-03", I came across a minor anomaly.

The first paragraph under section "9.5 POST' starts like this:
"The POST method is used to request that the destination server accept the
entity ........"

This is the only place in the whole document that the phrase "destination
server" is used, while every where else the phrase "origin server" is used
to represent "The server on which a given resource resides or is to be
created."(definition from the terminology).
Within the same section(9.5),  a few paragraphs later, a new paragraph
starts like this:
"If a resource has been created on the origin server, ........"  which
implies that we are referring to the same server in the same context by two
different names (I called it an anomaly since 'origin' and 'destination'
have conflicting meanings).

In the context of POST, the phrase "destination server" makes more sense,
but I was wondering for the sake of consistency, we should either change it
to "origin server", or document the new phrase "destination server" in the
terminology section as something that makes sense only under "POST" action.

Overall, this Internet-Draft is excellent and outstanding because it has
been kept very simple and easy to understand, yet  providing a complete
specification. Great work!

Thanks,
Ravi Badrachalam
Andersen Consulting



Received: by src-mail.pa.dec.com; id AA02185; Sun, 5 Jul 1998 18:14:00 -0700
Received: from mail1.digital.com by pobox1.pa.dec.com (5.65v3.2/1.1.10.5/07Nov97-1157AM)
	id AA30252; Sun, 5 Jul 1998 18:13:48 -0700
Received: from www10.w3.org (www10.w3.org [18.23.0.20])
	by mail1.digital.com (8.8.8/8.8.8/WV1.0f) with ESMTP id SAA03669
	for <jg@pa.dec.com>; Sun, 5 Jul 1998 18:13:47 -0700 (PDT)
From: ravi.badrachalam@ac.com
Received: from sxhab.compuserve.net (sxhab.compuserve.net [149.174.177.79]) by www10.w3.org (8.8.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id VAA27623 for <jg@w3.org>; Sun, 5 Jul 1998 21:07:04 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from aamta.compuserve.net (nthnsaab.ibmnotes.compuserve.com [149.174.177.77]) by sxhab.compuserve.net (8.8.8/8.6.12) with SMTP id VAA05049.; Sun, 5 Jul 1998 21:03:00 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by aamta.compuserve.net(Lotus SMTP MTA SMTP v4.6 (462.2 9-3-1997))  id 85256639.000584DF ; Sun, 5 Jul 1998 21:00:16 -0400
X-Lotus-Fromdomain: ACIN@CSERVE
To: jg@w3.org
Message-Id: <86256639.00051A11.00@aamta.compuserve.net>
Date: Sun, 5 Jul 1998 20:00:23 -0500
Subject: A suggestion for correction on HTTP/1.1 draft
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; 
	Boundary="0__=4BgnYlZpYlCMd2U2qgX7lZYCGguljFCmJN8zz9pddvpq4weSnN82oCo6"

--0__=4BgnYlZpYlCMd2U2qgX7lZYCGguljFCmJN8zz9pddvpq4weSnN82oCo6
Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

Hi Jim,
I tried sending the attached email to the 'http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com' as
suggested in the HTTP/1.1 Internet-Draft, but it came back with a
'connection timed out' error. Since you are one of the primary authors for
this draft, I thought I could forward it to you.
Thanks,
Ravi Badrachalam
Andersen Consulting
(Embedded image moved to file: PIC07364.PCX)
Ravi Badrachalam
07/03/98 03:48 PM

To:   http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com
cc:
Subject:  A suggestion for correction on HTTP/1.1 draft

While browsing through your HTTP Internet-Draft "
draft-ietf-http-v11-spec-rev-03", I came across a minor anomaly.

The first paragraph under section "9.5 POST' starts like this:
"The POST method is used to request that the destination server accept the
entity ........"

This is the only place in the whole document that the phrase "destination
server" is used, while every where else the phrase "origin server" is used
to represent "The server on which a given resource resides or is to be
created."(definition from the terminology).
Within the same section(9.5),  a few paragraphs later, a new paragraph
starts like this:
"If a resource has been created on the origin server, ........"  which
implies that we are referring to the same server in the same context by two
different names (I called it an anomaly since 'origin' and 'destination'
have conflicting meanings).

In the context of POST, the phrase "destination server" makes more sense,
but I was wondering for the sake of consistency, we should either change it
to "origin server", or document the new phrase "destination server" in the
terminology section as something that makes sense only under "POST" action.

Overall, this Internet-Draft is excellent and outstanding because it has
been kept very simple and easy to understand, yet  providing a complete
specification. Great work!

Thanks,
Ravi Badrachalam
Andersen Consulting


--0__=4BgnYlZpYlCMd2U2qgX7lZYCGguljFCmJN8zz9pddvpq4weSnN82oCo6
Content-type: application/octet-stream; 
	name="PIC07364.PCX"
Content-transfer-encoding: base64
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--0__=4BgnYlZpYlCMd2U2qgX7lZYCGguljFCmJN8zz9pddvpq4weSnN82oCo6--


Received on Tuesday, 7 July 1998 19:53:39 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 24 September 2003 06:33:19 EDT