- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Tue, 02 Feb 2010 17:57:23 +0100
- To: Anthony Bryan <anthonybryan@gmail.com>
- CC: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Anthony Bryan wrote: > ... >> The definitions of entity/representation/whatnot are on the TODO list >> anyway. >> >> That being said, how about: >> >> "Multiple representations may associated with a particular response status." > > > "Multiple representations may be associated with a particular response status." Ack :-) >>> 2) I think this means "*" for subtype, for example "text/*" and not >>> literally "type/*". (While we literally mean "*/*"). Maybe because >>> this comes directly after the ABNF it is fine? >>> >>> The asterisk "*" character is used to group media types into ranges, >>> with "*/*" indicating all media types and "type/*" indicating all >>> subtypes of that type. >> I'm not sure what this refers to; could you please supply some context? > > CURRENT TEXT from 5.1 Accept > > The asterisk "*" character is used to group media types into ranges, > with "*/*" indicating all media types and "type/*" indicating all > subtypes of that type. > > > To me, it reads like these would both be valid, even though only the > first one actually is? That is, "*/*" is an actual quote, where those > exact characters are used. And the other is not. > > Accept: */* > Accept: type/* Well, if there was a type called "type", it would be valid. It seems to me that "...and "type/*" indicating all subtypes of that type" is sufficiently clear. Do you think something like "...and "X/*" indicating all subtypes of type X" would make things clearer (this would be easier if IETF specs allowed font changes...). BR, Julian
Received on Tuesday, 2 February 2010 16:58:11 UTC