- From: Martin J. Dürst <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
- Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2016 20:04:54 +0900
- To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@greenbytes.de>, RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>, <fielding@gbiv.com>, <ben@nostrum.com>, <alissa@cooperw.in>, <aamelnikov@fastmail.fm>, <mnot@mnot.net>
- CC: <nekt@nekt.ru>, <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 2016/07/06 19:52, Julian Reschke wrote: > On 06.07.2016 12:48, RFC Errata System wrote: >> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC7231, >> "Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP/1.1): Semantics and Content". >> >> -------------------------------------- >> You may review the report below and at: >> http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=7231&eid=4734 >> Corrected Text >> -------------- >> Accept-Language = 1#( language-range [ weight ] ) >> language-range = >> <language-range, see [RFC5646], Section 2.1> >> Accept-Language: da, en-GB;q=0.8, en;q=0.7 >> >> would mean: "I prefer Danish, but will accept British English and >> other types of English". >> >> Notes >> ----- >> RFC4647 -> RFC5646 >> en-gb -> en-GB >> ... > > As far as I can tell, language-range is defined in RFC 4647, not in RFC > 5646. So the change as proposed seems to be incorrect. Yes indeed, see e.g. http://tools.ietf.org/html/bcp47. The other change, from 'en-gb' to 'en-GB', may be seen as a tiny stylistic improvement (because the 'canonical' way to write country codes in language tags is upper case), but is not at all required (because language tags are case-insensitive). Regards, Martin.
Received on Wednesday, 6 July 2016 11:05:36 UTC