Just a few minor ones: Section 4.3.4: Mentioning that HTTP is not a MIME-conformant protocol, without mentioning why, or at least a pointer to where in the spec this is explained, leaves the reader a little cold. Section 5.2.1: The material on If-Modified-Since seems out of place. Perhaps move it to the section on that header (5.4.7). Section 5.2.3: Mentioning HTML forms here should provide either a definition of a FORM or a reference to the HTML spec. Section 5.4.1: Mentioning in-line images should have a reference to the HTML spec. Section 5.4.2: The 'Note:' at the bottom has an extra period at the end. Section 6.1: The comment about "HTTP/1.0" being sufficient to differentiate Full-Response and Simple-Response seems either superfluous or wrong. Why not make sure there is a 3 digit integer following it too? (nit) Section 6.2.2: I'm agreement with the momentum in the group meeting that spec-ing this should be as bland as possible, not requiring a subset of HTML. -- Eric W. Sink, Senior Software Engineer -- eric@spyglass.com http://www.spyglass.com/~eric/home.htmReceived on Tuesday, 4 April 1995 15:10:13 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 2 February 2023 18:42:55 UTC