#461, was: p4: editorial suggestions

[Julian Reschke <[e-mail]>]

On 2013-04-23 05:47, Mark Nottingham wrote:
>
> * 2.1 "...avoid confusing cache behaviour." It's not just caches; suggest "...avoid undesired behaviour."

<http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/changeset/2230>

> * 3.1 "...instead they MUST respond with the 412 (Precondition Failed) status code."  This is too strong; e.g., what if authentication is needed? Suggest an "unless..." clause allowing other error status codes.

This is indeed a change from 2616 where we had:

"If the request would, without the If-Match header field, result in 
anything other than a 2xx or 412 status, then the If-Match header MUST 
be ignored." -- 
<http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/rfc2616.html#header.if-match>

The change happened between -21 and -22; maybe we should just go back to 
the original text?

> * 3.2 needs a references to "unsafe" in p2.

<http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/changeset/2230>


> * 3.4 same problem with MUST respond as 3.1.
>
> * 5 Paragraphs two and three repeat what's been said previously in the document; are they necessary?

 From a quick glance section 5 provides a general overview of how things 
are designed to work; as such the text seems to be useful there. Do you 
see any problems besides the risk of inconsistencies with other text?

Best regards, Julian