#463, was: p7: editorial suggestions

Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> Sun, 28 April 2013 15:48 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf-http-wg-request@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 B8C3A21F97AF for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 28 Apr 2013 08:48:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id hfBbklv1VhOb for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 28 Apr 2013 08:48:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E95221F965C for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Sun, 28 Apr 2013 08:48:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1UWTo5-0003ct-6H for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Sun, 28 Apr 2013 15:46:29 +0000
Resent-Date: Sun, 28 Apr 2013 15:46:29 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1UWTo5-0003ct-6H@frink.w3.org>
Received: from lisa.w3.org ([128.30.52.41]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <julian.reschke@gmx.de>) id 1UWTnx-0003c5-82 for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Sun, 28 Apr 2013 15:46:21 +0000
Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.15.15]) by lisa.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <julian.reschke@gmx.de>) id 1UWTnw-0005sa-5o for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Sun, 28 Apr 2013 15:46:21 +0000
Received: from mailout-de.gmx.net ([10.1.76.1]) by mrigmx.server.lan (mrigmx001) with ESMTP (Nemesis) id 0LygpN-1UaArf3pwt-016BVw for <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>; Sun, 28 Apr 2013 17:45:52 +0200
Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 28 Apr 2013 15:45:52 -0000
Received: from p5DD954FC.dip0.t-ipconnect.de (EHLO [192.168.2.117]) [93.217.84.252] by mail.gmx.net (mp001) with SMTP; 28 Apr 2013 17:45:52 +0200
X-Authenticated: #1915285
X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX18YhsYjz50YjiHY6UDTTo+5oJXy4w1FIwxhDYXuJQ RjZVRnddScUD31
Message-ID: <517D4429.1020803@gmx.de>
Date: Sun, 28 Apr 2013 17:45:45 +0200
From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130328 Thunderbird/17.0.5
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
CC: "ietf-http-wg@w3.org Group" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
References: <BBC3AF8C-03C1-4A1E-B406-7DCE44AB4B0E@mnot.net>
In-Reply-To: <BBC3AF8C-03C1-4A1E-B406-7DCE44AB4B0E@mnot.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=212.227.15.15; envelope-from=julian.reschke@gmx.de; helo=mout.gmx.net
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.4
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: AWL=-2.482, BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: lisa.w3.org 1UWTnw-0005sa-5o c421fa92ba21b418f8964afdc77f1361
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: #463, was: p7: editorial suggestions
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/517D4429.1020803@gmx.de>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/17644
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: <http://www.w3.org/Mail/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org?subject=unsubscribe>

On 2013-04-23 05:48, Mark Nottingham wrote:
>
> * 2.1 "It uses an extensible, case-insensitive token..."  I know what's meant here, but the token itself isn't extensible; it's an extension point. Suggest: :It uses a case-insensitive token as a means to identify..."
>
> * 2.1 "...based upon a challenge received from the server..." --> "...based upon a challenge received in a response"  ("from the server" implies that the next inbound server generated the challenge, which isn't always the case).
>
> * 2.2 "Note that there can be multiple challenges with the same auth-scheme..." --> "Note that a response can have multiple challenges..."
>
> * 2.2 "Unless otherwise defined by the authentication scheme,..." --> "Unless specifically allowed by the authentication scheme..."
>
> * 2.3.1 "... can only be used once per challenge/credentials."  --> "...once in a challenge or credential."
>
> * 2.3.1 needs references to p6 for cache-control directives it talks about.
>
> * 3.1 "The client MAY repeat the request with a new or replaced Authorisation header field."  s/client/user agent/
>
> * 4.1 'The "Authorization" header field allows a user agent to authenticate itself with a server..."   s/server/origin server/
>
> * 4.3 "Its value consists of credentials containing the authentication information of the user agent for the proxy..."   s/user agent/client/
>
> * 6.2 First paragraph - all instances of 'server' to 'origin server'
>
> * 6.2 "This is of particular concern when a server hosts resources for multiple parties..."   s/server/origin server/
>
> * 6.2 "...by using a different host name for each party."   s/host name/origin/   (or similar; i.e. you can do this with ports too)
>
> --
> Mark Nottingham   http://www.mnot.net/

-> <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/changeset/2229>

Best regards, Julian