W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > April to June 2013

Re: p2: Purely editorial feedback

From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Date: Sat, 20 Apr 2013 18:25:48 +1000
Message-Id: <EAB589EB-35D5-434F-BEA3-7B251275B951@mnot.net>
To: "ietf-http-wg@w3.org Group" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Just a few more...

* 3.4 - "supplier of representations to the origin server" seems odd; shouldn't this just be "the resource"?

* 3.4 introduces "proactive" and "reactive" conneg, as a replacement for server-driven and agent-driven. I'm not at all sure that these terms are any better than the previous ones, and changing them may just create more confusion. Can we either find better ones, or revert to the originals?

* 3.4.2 explains reactive negotiation (i.e., where the client chooses from a list of links), and gives examples of how it's done with 300 responses, but doesn't mention that a hypertext format can support reactive negotiation natively, and therefore can happen with 200 OK responses as well (and I believe this is by far the most common form of conneg on the Web today). It would be good to illustrate this.

* 4.1 second to last paragraph talks about when Allow should be generated, but speaks about it in terms of an origin server generating the header, when it's very often implemented on a per-resource basis. Consider couching in those terms.



--
Mark Nottingham   http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Saturday, 20 April 2013 08:26:11 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 11:11:12 UTC