W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > October 2012

Fwd: Second Working Group Last Call for HTTP/1.1 p4 to p7

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 08:29:03 +0200
Message-ID: <5086392F.8060602@gmx.de>
To: "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Second Working Group Last Call for HTTP/1.1 p4 to p7
Resent-Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2012 23:04:12 +0000
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 10:03:43 +1100
From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
To: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>

In conjunction with the WGLC for p1 and p2, we're going to run a Second 
WGLC for p4 to p7. The changes here are mostly editorial, with some 
driven by previous WGLC discussion; hopefully there shouldn't be any 

As such, WGLC will end with that for p1 and p2, on November 25.

* Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP/1.1): Conditional Requests

   Diffs from the previous WGLC:

* Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP/1.1): Range Requests

   Diffs from the previous WGLC:

* Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP/1.1): Caching

   Diffs from the previous WGLC:

* Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP/1.1): Authentication

   Diffs from the previous WGLC:

Providing Feedback

Your input should be sent to this mailing list, clearly marked with 
"WGLC" and the appropriate part. E.g., with Subject lines such as:

Subject: WGLC review of p7-caching
Subject: WGLC issue: "foo" in p7

Issues that you believe to be editorial in nature (e.g., typos, 
suggested re-phrasing) can be grouped together in a single e-mail. 
Substantive issues (what we call "design" issues) that may need 
discussion should be sent one per e-mail, with a descriptive subject.

If you disagree with the resolution of a previously discussed issue, 
you're encouraged to note that at this time.

What's Next

The Working Group will discuss these issues, re-issuing drafts as 
necessary. Tickets raised on these drafts will have a severity of "In WG 
Last Call" , and once they are disposed of, we'll see if there's 
consensus on going to IETF Last Call on them.

Thanks yet again to the editors for their hard work in getting to this 


Mark Nottingham   http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Tuesday, 23 October 2012 06:29:30 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:16:28 UTC