Re: Murray Kucherawy's No Objection on draft-ietf-httpbis-header-structure-18: (with COMMENT)
"Murray S. Kucherawy" <superuser@gmail.com> Thu, 21 May 2020 07:45 UTC
Return-Path: <ietf-http-wg-request+bounce-httpbisa-archive-bis2juki=lists.ie@listhub.w3.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0CA1F3A0AA1 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 21 May 2020 00:45:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.748
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.748 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id t1UwOTGwC8Nj for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 21 May 2020 00:45:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lyra.w3.org (lyra.w3.org [128.30.52.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 797123A0A9E for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Thu, 21 May 2020 00:45:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by lyra.w3.org with local (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1jbfqW-0007oU-RG for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 21 May 2020 07:42:28 +0000
Resent-Date: Thu, 21 May 2020 07:42:28 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1jbfqW-0007oU-RG@lyra.w3.org>
Received: from titan.w3.org ([128.30.52.76]) by lyra.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from <superuser@gmail.com>) id 1jbfqV-0007ne-UG for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 21 May 2020 07:42:27 +0000
Received: from mail-vs1-xe2b.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4864:20::e2b]) by titan.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from <superuser@gmail.com>) id 1jbfqU-0000n7-DJ for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Thu, 21 May 2020 07:42:27 +0000
Received: by mail-vs1-xe2b.google.com with SMTP id y13so3492063vsk.8 for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Thu, 21 May 2020 00:42:26 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=VaUvXeYGYEcKNwFajtFFr6Uvcy8oWIZqBXgv0LH4qiU=; b=EYot4cPJaCiQK2EfUGO6TJ+fW2pMjOopbEK7XKZXxFGG8GQ6+cxGOiqid8/A3zZxAF 1sVlByvqDA50SutyI0ufkjveRS0xY/9rmQZL6NWeKfB+0QE1ghpFyBHaLZvG5EeauXcl RhlbNvHOwI1GZQj1zz7hD3l3YiInX1gsh1E/M5db0MZgptBQ7bDkwDXcZf84t/g7fkfn 5hzdLZWe+SNgH0F2Vsu8DmTM6VrPrnwyDJC3kxXgF4PvLiWbeqqfAhzkCcnGRFLEZ94a X1TJ+CpWaaC4bsAS0p8rbwv79/uYZP7zLHOPbMB4Ql/iXzTe45IPw7UH9KDS12die6hU gL4w==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=VaUvXeYGYEcKNwFajtFFr6Uvcy8oWIZqBXgv0LH4qiU=; b=VCmlxAikVpaCg/cSQAGkr/ZozB84cLXgSRmC9wLl2jtRSuZZby0JczioDR6e++SPo2 +PbnOJ1pPt57D1XduRKCxdrPXBjf9pfRCi5ADtzOr3jnpgtJ9lvRiDYsrOyWCxbQ6YyM 0WMh5Y30HtqmrBYd53QusPPf/jRSPbE1SlFiafoT5l6l5xJ83ODTRAR4Bm35GgaucxnC Q7w3dbhAGSSYCgh9K6kWXilQoJ07ZoV5ewRa73UNVTOJUdOtNSrVLNG7CGHklXMn+pvz sTNFhB5dfT0u8kdTWgzLcCbUxph96OHBW+TRvKcRkUbxSSdZr3K+r6o7e9CsmBPemEMk JiAQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5337nmSNojngNQwrWpcTV/zRVb64plBiy9hp8zzBCplpTP1z5ZI2 BQk7zdDwPWNCiuxMLpnjcMRJ7LrALyJvIzZIqkQ=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwvHZELilRsSfIZ4FmOeZmJ/RkxUzyr2Fdp3ZPqffmR9Pm70qmNFmtY6UMpckKZY7cq5btSX0xFqlICxNd/vys=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6102:493:: with SMTP id n19mr6134559vsa.8.1590046935129; Thu, 21 May 2020 00:42:15 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <159004478570.11266.5904827781495737638@ietfa.amsl.com> <D2DFBD61-3731-48D0-8882-3A6E39D6F60C@mnot.net>
In-Reply-To: <D2DFBD61-3731-48D0-8882-3A6E39D6F60C@mnot.net>
From: "Murray S. Kucherawy" <superuser@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 21 May 2020 00:42:03 -0700
Message-ID: <CAL0qLwZ6_2xx+UpHFyb2WXkgvEafmtN6qtw-GsZvqiTr2kLkPQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Cc: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-httpbis-header-structure@ietf.org, httpbis-chairs@ietf.org, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, Tommy Pauly <tpauly@apple.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000bea2d905a623a605"
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2607:f8b0:4864:20::e2b; envelope-from=superuser@gmail.com; helo=mail-vs1-xe2b.google.com
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.1
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, W3C_AA=-1, W3C_WL=-1
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: titan.w3.org 1jbfqU-0000n7-DJ 2eb54ffbf031dd4a7b828cd26beb0968
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: Murray Kucherawy's No Objection on draft-ietf-httpbis-header-structure-18: (with COMMENT)
Archived-At: <https://www.w3.org/mid/CAL0qLwZ6_2xx+UpHFyb2WXkgvEafmtN6qtw-GsZvqiTr2kLkPQ@mail.gmail.com>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/37698
X-Loop: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Resent-Sender: ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org
Precedence: list
List-Id: <ietf-http-wg.w3.org>
List-Help: <https://www.w3.org/Mail/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org?subject=unsubscribe>
On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 12:12 AM Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> wrote: > > Should Section 3.1 be explicit that lists are ordered? It does say > "array" but > > some definitions I found for that term don't explicitly say anything > about > > order either, just a "collection". > > I don't think that's confused anyone to date; if it were unordered, we'd > say "set." > It's more that you were so precise about just about everything else, this detail seemed absent. But if it's clear enough to everyone already, ship it. -MSK
- Murray Kucherawy's No Objection on draft-ietf-htt… Murray Kucherawy via Datatracker
- Re: Murray Kucherawy's No Objection on draft-ietf… Mark Nottingham
- Re: Murray Kucherawy's No Objection on draft-ietf… Murray S. Kucherawy