- From: cowwoc <cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org>
- Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2013 11:07:38 -0400
- To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- CC: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Hi Mark,
I'd like to bring
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/ietf-http-wg/2013OctDec/0295.html to
your attention (since it's related).
Thanks,
Gili
On 22/10/2013 9:12 PM, Mark Nottingham wrote:
> Fixed in <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/changeset/2431>.
>
> Thanks,
>
>
> On 12/10/2013, at 1:22 AM, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote:
>
>> On 2013-10-11 16:07, cowwoc wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-httpbis-p6-cache-24#section-3
>>> reads "has a status code that is defined as cacheable (see Section 4.2.2
>>> <http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-httpbis-p6-cache-24#section-4.2.2>)"
>>> but section 4.2.2 does not define which status codes are cacheable. If
>>> you flip back to rev 21 of this document, the same paragraph used to
>>> point at
>>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-httpbis-p6-cache-21#section-4.1.2
>>> which did list the status codes.
>>>
>>> Is this a documentation bug?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Gili
>> Potentially.
>>
>> Mark: it appears this happened with <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/changeset/2179>.
>>
>> Best regards, Julian
> --
> Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/
>
>
>
Received on Wednesday, 23 October 2013 15:08:13 UTC