W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > July to September 2008

Re: HTTPS URI scheme (i128), was: https URI scheme

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2008 21:50:04 +0200
Message-ID: <48B5AFEC.1030108@gmx.de>
To: Brian Smith <brian@briansmith.org>
CC: ietf-http-wg@w3.org

Brian Smith wrote:
> Julian,
> 
> The abstract of part 1 says that part 1 defines the HTTPS scheme, but
> Section 3.2.2 says that another document defines it. I don't know how to
> reword things to make it non-contradictory--maybe just take out "and HTTPS"
> from the abstract?

Yes, I noticed that as well. As long as we do not define HTTPS we 
probably should take it out.

> Section 3.2.2 is titled "http URL". Because of the added reference to RFC
> 2818 for HTTPS, a new title would be better. I recommend "The HTTP and HTTPS
> URI Schemes," to match the text in the abstract of part 1. Also, the
> paragraph that says 'The "https" scheme is defined in [RFC2818].' would be
> better off without the "Note:" prefix, since "Note:" doesn't actually mean
> anything.

Hm, no. The section now mentions https, but that's it. I don't think 
that merits renaming it.

The "Note:" prefix matches other parts of the specs where we want to 
make clear that this is just a note, not part of the normative text. I 
think this applies here as well.

BR, Julian
Received on Wednesday, 27 August 2008 19:50:49 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 06:50:54 GMT