Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-httpbis-no-vary-search-05.txt

[Amos Jeffries <[e-mail]>]

On 02/06/2026 15:10, Nidhi Jaju wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I agree with Tommy that renaming params/except to include/exclude is an 
> editorial change. The parsing and processing logic is unchanged, so what 
> we're discussing is which strings sit on the wire.
> 
> Each of the proposals has pros and cons. include/exclude reads more 
> naturally on its own, but as noted, "exclude" inside a field called "No- 
> Vary" is confusing depending on how you parse the field name, since the 
> things that are excluded are the ones that don't vary. Cache-Query- 
> Params came up as an option to replace No-Vary-Search, but it's not 
> clear that there's a significant enough win to justify a rename at this 
> point.


Developer A to B:
   Remember do not not exclude the items being included with No-* "exclude".


A public document needs to encourage clear and simple descriptions easy 
to communicate across language barriers and skill levels. 
Double-negatives are very bad descriptors.


FTR: I am against the "No-" prefix to avoid confusion and bad 
interpretations. The rest is bikeshedding.


HTH
Amos