issue 258, was: Comments on draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp

• From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
• Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2010 16:24:00 +0100
• To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
• CC: Adam Barth <ietf@adambarth.com>, httpbis <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
• Message-ID: <4CD02D10.10203@gmx.de>

>> =>  Parameter names MUST NOT be repeated.
>>
>> The document should not phrase normative requirements in the passive
>> voice.  Instead, the document should make clear which protocol
>> partipants are bound by each requirement.  For example, this
>> requirement probably should read "servers MUST NOT generate
>> Content-Disposition header field values with multiple instances of the
>> same parameter name."
>
> I think this is largely editorial feedback; it probably isn't appropriate to say 'servers..' but something like
>
> Senders MUST NOT generate C-D header field values with multiple instances of the same parameter name.
>
> Ticket:
>    http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/258

I made it say:

    Senders MUST NOT generate header field values with multiple instances
    of the same parameter name.  Recipients SHOULD treat these values as
    invalid.

(see <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/changeset/1073>).

Best regards, Julian

Received on Tuesday, 2 November 2010 15:24:39 UTC