Hi everyone, I've reviewed this document, and while I'm sully supportive of the general direction, I think it could benefit from a bit more editorial work before publication. I've filed a few issues (see below) but overall I think the format section needs to be more precise about the meaning of all the fields. Thanks, David https://github.com/httpwg/http-extensions/issues/1943 https://github.com/httpwg/http-extensions/issues/1944 https://github.com/httpwg/http-extensions/issues/1945 https://github.com/httpwg/http-extensions/issues/1946 https://github.com/httpwg/http-extensions/issues/1947 https://github.com/httpwg/http-extensions/issues/1948 On Thu, Feb 3, 2022 at 6:29 PM Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> wrote: > This message begins Working Group Last Call for > draft-ietf-httpbis-binary-message-01, 'Binary Representation of HTTP > Messages'. > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-httpbis-binary-message/ > > Please read the document, raise issues if you find any, and indicate > on-list whether you support its publication. > > WGLC will end on 4 March 2022. > > Cheers, > > -- > Mark Nottingham https://www.mnot.net/ > > >
Received on Monday, 7 February 2022 19:28:07 UTC