Re: NEW ISSUE: Monitoring Connections text

* Henrik Nordstrom wrote:
>Personally I find the text quite clear. The way I read it it's a chain
>of conditions.
>
>1. client SHOULD monitor
>2. If monitoring and seeing an error it SHOULD ..(if not monitoring it
>won't see the error, so the rest do not apply then) 
>3. If chunked then it MAY terminate the body using chunked encoding
>4. Else (Content-Length) it MUST close the connection.

My main concern is getting rid of the MAY as there is no new option
being offered by the protocol, and getting rid of the "empty trailer"
part. I take it Jamie also find the original text unclear in that it
has both "SHOULD" and "MAY" for the termination if chunked is used,
and "SHOULD" and "MUST" if Content-Length is used, though I would not
read the original this way.

>This is imho less clear than the original. Especially regarding how to
>prematurely end a chunked message which in my experience isn't very
>obvious to most people that you can.. (anyone remember the NTLM auth
>discussion here some months ago?)

If you want to say that, it would be better to say "by sending the
last-chunk at the next opportunity". There is no such thing as a
"zero length chunk". I'm fine with any text that does not have the
odd "MAY" and "empty trailer".
-- 
Björn Höhrmann · mailto:bjoern@hoehrmann.de · http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de
Weinh. Str. 22 · Telefon: +49(0)621/4309674 · http://www.bjoernsworld.de
68309 Mannheim · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.websitedev.de/

Received on Wednesday, 21 November 2007 20:51:53 UTC