- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2011 22:22:23 +0200
- To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- CC: httpbis Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 2011-07-24 20:11, Julian Reschke wrote: > On 2011-05-24 08:39, Julian Reschke wrote: >> ... > > Revised proposal from the IETF 81 terminal room: > > "Conformance and Error Handling > The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", > "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this > document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119]. > > This document defines conformance criteria for several roles in HTTP > communication, including Senders, Recipients, Clients, Servers, > User-Agents, Origin Servers, Intermediaries, Proxies and Gateways. See > [ref to Terminology] for a definitions of these terms. > > An implementation is considered conformant if it complies with all of > the requirements associated with its role(s). Note that SHOULD-level > requirements are relevant here, unless one of the documented exceptions > is applicable. > > This document also uses ABNF to define valid protocol elements. In > addition to the prose requirements placed upon them, Senders MUST NOT > generate protocol elements that are invalid. > > Unless noted otherwise, Recipients MAY take steps to recover a usable > protocol element from an invalid construct. However, HTTP does not > define specific error handling mechanisms, except in cases where it has > direct impact on security. This is because different uses of the > protocol require different error handling strategies; for example, a Web > browser may wish to transparently recover from a response where the > Location header field doesn't parse according to the ABNF, whereby in a > systems control protocol using HTTP, this type of error recovery could > lead to dangerous consequences." > > Changes: > > - Simplified the first sentence of the last paragraph > > - Changed the example to use the Location header field > > ...and we're going to put this into the Introductions for all seven parts. > > Feedback appreciated, > > Julian ...incorporated as proposed <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/changeset/1452>. Best regards, Julian
Received on Sunday, 23 October 2011 20:23:04 UTC