- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Sat, 05 Jul 2008 19:05:21 +0200
- To: Henrik Nordstrom <henrik@henriknordstrom.net>
- CC: ietf-http-wg@w3.org, Robert Brewer <fumanchu@aminus.org>
Henrik Nordstrom wrote:
> On lör, 2008-07-05 at 12:28 +0200, Julian Reschke wrote:
>> NEW:
>>
>> 2. If a Transfer-Encoding header field (Section 8.7) and the
>> "chunked" transfer-coding (Section 3.4) is used, the transfer-
>> length is defined by the use of that this transfer-coding. If
>> the "chunked" transfer-coding is not present, the transfer-length
>> is defined by the sender closing the connection.
>
> Hmm.. "is present" fell off somewhere.
Sorry.
> If a Transfer-Encoding header field (Section 8.7) is present and
> the "chunked" transfer-coding [...]
>
> And to rule out any chance of people getting confused over "closing the
> connection" one should perhaps overstate the Transfer-Encoding header..
> last sentence again
>
> [...]. If a Transfer-Encoding header field is present and the
> "chunked" transfer-coding is not present, the transfer-length is
> defined by the sender closing the connection.
Sounds good.
Robert Brewer observed shortly after:
> "...that this transfer-coding" needs a grammar tweak.
Indeed. I was flip-flopping between "this" and "that" and ended up with
both. Sorry.
New proposal:
2. If a Transfer-Encoding header field (Section 8.7) is present and
the "chunked" transfer-coding (Section 3.4) is used, the
transfer-length is defined by the use of this transfer-coding.
If a Transfer-Encoding header field is present and the "chunked"
transfer-coding is not present, the transfer-length is defined by
the sender closing the connection.
Also in
<http://www.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/attachment/ticket/28/i28.2.diff>.
BR, Julian
Received on Saturday, 5 July 2008 17:06:08 UTC