W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > April to June 2009

Re: Issue 161, was: Base for first-byte-pos, last-byte-pos, suffix-length

From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Date: Wed, 6 May 2009 16:59:47 +1000
Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <0531A9E7-2529-48C1-B79C-ECAC7DBA0F71@mnot.net>
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
No one has complained about it being editorial, so it's your  
(collective, theoretically) decision.

Of course, they may complain *after* it's in, but that's how it goes.

Cheers,


On 06/05/2009, at 4:50 PM, Julian Reschke wrote:

> Julian Reschke wrote:
>> Mark Nottingham wrote:
>>> It gives me a bit of pause, but I think that's OK (as long as  
>>> they're all clearly defined as DIGITs).
>>> ...
>> They are.
>> Proposed patch: <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/attachment/ticket/161/161.diff 
>> >.
>
> I have heard no complaints so far; should I make this change?
>
> BR, Julian
>
>


--
Mark Nottingham     http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Wednesday, 6 May 2009 07:01:39 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 06:51:02 GMT