- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Sun, 04 Nov 2012 16:28:06 +0100
- To: Dan Winship <dan.winship@gmail.com>
- CC: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 2012-11-03 23:53, Dan Winship wrote: > On 11/03/2012 10:39 AM, Julian Reschke wrote: >>> Removing the word "hypertext" from the last line would make this a >>> more accurate description of present-day HTTP. > >> The "H" in HTTP stands for "Hypertext". As such I'd prefer to keep this, > > Sure, but "it's not just for hypertext any more". > >>>> 2.7.3. http and https URI Normalization and Comparison >>> >>>> Likewise, an empty path component is equivalent to an absolute >>>> path of "/", so the normal form is to provide a path of "/" >>>> instead. >>> >>> Except that an empty path is not equivalent to a path of "/" in an >>> OPTIONS request sent to a proxy... >> >> That's the "authority-form", right? That's not an HTTP(s) URI anyway. > > No, not authority-form. 5.3 says: > >> For example, the request >> >> OPTIONS http://www.example.org:8001 HTTP/1.1 >> >> would be forwarded by the final proxy as >> >> OPTIONS * HTTP/1.1 >> Host: www.example.org:8001 > > but "OPTIONS http://www.example.org:8001/ HTTP/1.1" would be forwarded > as "OPTIONS / HTTP/1.1". So the empty-path and "/"-path forms are not > equivalent in this one case. > > (although now that you mention it, using authority-form here instead of > absolute-form-minus-"/" would have made a lot more sense...) OK; added as <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/397>. >>>> A.2. Changes from RFC 2616 >>> >>> We probably want to double-check these sections against the issue >>> tracker before final publication, but one particular thing that stuck >>> out to me as missing is the addition of the CONNECT rule and removal >> >> You mean the inclusion of CONNECT? We already mention that in P2. Should >> we mention here as well? >> >>> of the multipart/byteranges rule from Section 3.3.3. > > Sorry, both parts of that sentence were referring to Section 3.3.3; the > rule about CONNECT responses in 3.3.3 is new since 2616. I see. Fixed with <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/changeset/1973>. Best regards, Julian
Received on Sunday, 4 November 2012 15:28:34 UTC