W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > July to September 2007

Re: NEW ISSUE: example for matching functions, was: Weak and strong ETags

From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 20:25:31 -0700
Message-Id: <BAD2B36F-03AA-46FA-B760-ED44DE2B3ABD@mnot.net>
Cc: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>

Sorry, I missed this because it was buried inside a thread. Now i71;
   http://www.w3.org/Protocols/HTTP/1.1/rfc2616bis/issues/#i71


On 28/05/2007, at 4:36 AM, Julian Reschke wrote:

>
> Hi,
>
> I'm currently going through <http://www.w3.org/Protocols/HTTP/1.1/ 
> rfc2616bis/draft-lafon-rfc2616bis-latest.html>, checking for  
> changes that currenly do not appear in the issues list at <http:// 
> www.w3.org/Protocols/HTTP/1.1/rfc2616bis/issues/>.
>
> This is one of these... (in context: <http://www.w3.org/Protocols/ 
> HTTP/1.1/rfc2616bis/draft-lafon-rfc2616bis-latest.html#rfc.section. 
> 13.3.3>):
>
> Julian Reschke wrote:
>> Hi,
>> given the fact that more than a few persons were confused about  
>> the weak matching function, I'd propose to add an example here, to  
>> appear below the definitions in 13.3.3:
>>     The example below shows the results for a set of entity tag  
>> pairs,
>>     and both the weak and strong comparison function results:
>>          +--------+--------+-------------------+-----------------+
>>          | ETag 1 | ETag 2 | Strong Comparison | Weak Comparison |
>>          +--------+--------+-------------------+-----------------+
>>          | W/"1"  | W/"1"  | no match          | match           |
>>          |        |        |                   |                 |
>>          | W/"1"  | W/"2"  | no match          | no match        |
>>          |        |        |                   |                 |
>>          | W/"1"  | "1"    | no match          | match           |
>>          |        |        |                   |                 |
>>          | "1"    | "1"    | match             | match           |
>>          +--------+--------+-------------------+-----------------+
>> Best regards, Julian
>
> (a) Do we have agreement that this example is correct?
>
> (b) Is there consensus to have it included?
>
> Best regards, Julian
>


--
Mark Nottingham     http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Tuesday, 17 July 2007 03:25:46 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 06:50:15 GMT