- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2008 23:07:27 +0200
- To: Brian Smith <brian@briansmith.org>
- CC: 'Dave Kristol' <dmk-http@kristol.org>, 'HTTP Working Group' <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Brian Smith wrote: > Julian Reschke wrote: >> Note: the "Cookie" and "Set-Cookie" headers as implemented in >> practice (as opposed to how they are specified in [RFC2109]) >> can occur multiple times, but do not use the list syntax, >> and thus can not be combined into a single line. >> (See [Kri2001] for details.) Also note that the >> Cookie2/Set-Cookie2 headers specified in [RFC2965] do not >> share this problem. > > "Cannot" is better than "can not" here. But, what exactly does "cannot" mean Ack. > in a specification? Instead of making this a note, it is better to make it a > normative part of the specification using RFC 2119 language: I doubt that we can get consensus to add more than a note here. But let's hear what the WG thinks. > ... > Dave Kristol's paper is excellent but it is large and it talks about > political things as much as it talks about technical concerns. That is why I > changed the citation to mention section A.2.3 specifically. > ... Ack. -> <http://www.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/attachment/ticket/129/i129.2.diff> BR, Julian
Received on Friday, 15 August 2008 21:08:13 UTC