W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > January to March 2015

Re: draft-reschke-http-cice vs discussions in Toronto @ IETF 90: use as response header field

From: Amos Jeffries <squid3@treenet.co.nz>
Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2015 23:55:06 +1300
Message-ID: <54CF578A.3080002@treenet.co.nz>
To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
On 2/02/2015 9:18 p.m., Julian Reschke wrote:
> On 2015-02-02 09:07, Mark Nottingham wrote:
>> Yes, but the semantics of those headers are exactly the same in both
>> directions.
> 
> I think that's the case here, too. No?
> 

Unless I am completely mis-reading it.

In both directions, and for all status codes it means "I can receive
encoding format(s) X,Y,Z". The rest of the draft is just elaboration and
specific syntax. Yes?

Amos
Received on Monday, 2 February 2015 10:55:40 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:14:43 UTC