- From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2013 12:40:24 -0700
- To: Michael Sweet <msweet@apple.com>
- Cc: "ietf-http-wg@w3.org list" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 9 July 2013 10:12, Michael Sweet <msweet@apple.com> wrote: > I am uncomfortable with this wording primarily because a lot of POST usage > consists of streamed content - my particular interest is obviously printing, > but any streamed content will necessarily not be able to provide a > content-length header field. So instead I would suggest the following two > paragraphs instead: I think that your edits capture the spirit of what was intended by the existing text, with far less ambiguity. Unless I get objections, those can be integrated. > My other comment is that I don't see any discussion of the Expect header, > nor do I see a issue on Github... There was a brief discussion at the last interim. The feature is in serious jeopardy. See #18: https://github.com/http2/http2-spec/issues/18
Received on Tuesday, 9 July 2013 19:40:51 UTC