Re: Adam Roach's No Objection on charter-ietf-httpbis-07-01: (with COMMENT)

On Tue, Nov 20, 2018, at 11:52 PM, Adam Roach wrote:
> Adam Roach has entered the following ballot position for
> charter-ietf-httpbis-07-01: No Objection
> 
> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
> email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
> introductory paragraph, however.)
> 
> 
> 
> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-httpbis/
> 
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> COMMENT:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> > # HTTP/1.1 Revision
> 
> This seems a little confusing, as the HTTP/1.1 revision has already happened.
> Isn't this more like HTTP/1.1 and HTTP/2.0 maintenance?

No, the intent of this section is to do HTTP/1.1 revision. I will attempt to clarify this.

> > * Incorporate errata
> > * Address ambiguities
> > * Fix editorial problems which have led to misunderstandings of the
> > specification * Clarify conformance requirements * Remove known ambiguities
> > where they affect interoperability * Clarify existing methods of extensibility
> > * Remove or deprecate those features that are not widely implemented and also
> > unduly affect interoperability * Where necessary, add implementation advice
> 
> It looks like this list got wrapped somehow. Perhaps include blank lines between
> bullets?

This looks like a tool problem! Each item is on a separate line when editing text.

> > The Working Group may define extensions and other documents related to HTTP as
> > work items, provided that: * They are generic; i.e., not specific to one
> > application using HTTP. Note that Web browsing by definition is a generic use.
> > * The Working Group Chairs judge that there is consensus to take on the item
> > and believe that it will not interfere with the work described above, and * The
> > Area Director approves the addition and add corresponding milestones.
> 
> Same issue with bullet wrapping as above

As above.

Received on Wednesday, 21 November 2018 11:05:50 UTC