- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2015 08:13:32 +0200
- To: Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>, draft-ietf-httpbis-cice@ietf.org
- Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 2015-07-21 13:32, Barry Leiba wrote: > A fine document, well written; I have no comments on the content. Thanks. > I only have the question of why it doesn't "update" 7231. I think it > updates Section 5.3.4, in that clients need to know that they might > now see "Accept-Encoding" in a response. Without the "updates", > clients might be less likely to be changed to support this. Let's > discuss this, please. We are updating the header field registry: <http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/draft-reschke-http-cice-latest.html#iana.considerations>. The assumption being that for those parts of HTTP which have IANA registries, the registry itself is the normative location to find the protocol description for a given element. This scales better than "updates" which always applies to a complete RFC. > But this shouldn't get in the way of last call, so I'll go ahead and > request last call now. > > Barry, ART Director Best regards, Julian
Received on Wednesday, 22 July 2015 06:14:27 UTC