- From: Matthew Kerwin <matthew@kerwin.net.au>
- Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2018 10:25:12 +1000
- To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, phk@freebsd.dk
On 2 February 2018 at 09:55, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> wrote:
> This draft proposes solutions for a number of issues; see the change notes
> at the end as well as the issues closed to date:
>
> https://github.com/httpwg/http-extensions/issues?q=is%3Aissue+label%3Aheader-structure+is%3Aclosed
>
> I'm planning on talking about the open issues in London:
>
> https://github.com/httpwg/http-extensions/issues?q=is%3Aissue+label%3Aheader-structure+is%3Aopen
> ... but if you have feedback before that, it'd be great to hear it on the
> issues or here.
>
> Cheers,
One question springs to mind: should there be some sort of definition
for algorithmic operations like "remove"? I can infer that it
captures and returns the relevant substring, as distinct from the
"discard" operation, but I feel like it shouldn't need to be inferred.
Am I being overly pedantic?
Oh, and what's with the underscore in 4.9.1 Parsing Binary Content from Text?
~~~
3. Let b64_content be the result of removing content of input_string
up to but not including the first instance of the character "_".
If there is not a "_" character before the end of input_string,
throw an error.
~~~
Should that be an asterisk?
Cheers
--
Matthew Kerwin
http://matthew.kerwin.net.au/
Received on Friday, 2 February 2018 00:25:39 UTC