- From: Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>
- Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2015 02:18:19 -0400
- To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Cc: draft-ietf-httpbis-cice@ietf.org, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
>> I only have the question of why it doesn't "update" 7231. I think it >> updates Section 5.3.4, in that clients need to know that they might >> now see "Accept-Encoding" in a response. Without the "updates", >> clients might be less likely to be changed to support this. Let's >> discuss this, please. > > We are updating the header field registry: > <http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/draft-reschke-http-cice-latest.html#iana.considerations>. > The assumption being that for those parts of HTTP which have IANA > registries, the registry itself is the normative location to find the > protocol description for a given element. This scales better than "updates" > which always applies to a complete RFC. A fair answer; thanks. Consider that comment addressed. Barry
Received on Wednesday, 22 July 2015 06:18:48 UTC