- From: Steven Bingler <bingler@chromium.org>
- Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2025 17:40:38 -0500
- To: "Dale R. Worley" <worley@ariadne.com>
- Cc: draft-ietf-httpbis-rfc6265bis.all@ietf.org, ietf-http-wg@w3.org, last-call@ietf.org, gen-art@ietf.org
Hi Dale, Thanks for closing this out. > I only comment on an > oddity: the version at > https://github.com/httpwg/http-extensions/blob/main/draft-ietf-httpbis-rfc6265bis.md > does not have the section numbers I recently learned that you can view a preview of current drafts within https://github.com/httpwg/http-extensions at https://httpwg.org/http-extensions/ So https://httpwg.org/http-extensions/draft-ietf-httpbis-rfc6265bis.html will show the latest updates for this spec. - Steven On Wed, Nov 19, 2025 at 10:46 AM Dale R. Worley <worley@ariadne.com> wrote: > > Steven Bingler <bingler@chromium.org> writes: > > Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2025 12:09:33 -0400 > > My apologies for not responding sooner. > > All of my concerns have been addressed. In theory, I'd like to see the > character-set issues handled according to a more consistent theory, but > we need to be upward-compatible with reality, and that makes theoretical > consistency impossible. > > > You can find all the changes in the latest draft, > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-httpbis-rfc6265bis, > > plus a recent small commit: > > https://github.com/httpwg/http-extensions/commit/59f5e21e84e19ba81eae5484a22a2ed8dec9f445 > > The latest changes do improve a number of points. I only comment on an > oddity: the version at > https://github.com/httpwg/http-extensions/blob/main/draft-ietf-httpbis-rfc6265bis.md > does not have the section numbers, which can make it hard to track > references to e.g. "section 4.1.1". > > Dale
Received on Wednesday, 19 November 2025 22:40:53 UTC