- From: Alex Rousskov <rousskov@measurement-factory.com>
- Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2016 17:43:15 -0600
- To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Cc: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
On 04/19/2016 12:18 AM, Mark Nottingham wrote: > I *think* we've come to a place where there's agreement on accepting > the errata, but with BWS replacing OWS throughout; i.e.: > chunk-ext = *( BWS ";" BWS chunk-ext-name [ BWS "=" BWS chunk-ext-val ] ) > Everyone OK with that? There were no objections and two OKs (including mine). > If so -- Alexey, can we just annotate the errata with that when it's > accepted, or should this one be rejected and a new (smaller and > correct from the start) one be filed? It looks like this thread got stuck after that question and the errata entry is still in the "Reported" state. I have just witnessed a yet another developer being confused by this invisible syntax change. Mark, could you please push this fix forward somehow? Thank you, Alex.
Received on Wednesday, 17 August 2016 23:43:51 UTC