Re: [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC7232 (4957)

Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> Mon, 06 March 2017 05:50 UTC

Resent-Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2017 05:49:01 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1cklW1-0000xg-Rd@frink.w3.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.2 \(3259\))
From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
In-Reply-To: <20170306054351.11A0FB82D23@rfc-editor.org>
Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2017 16:47:52 +1100
Cc: Roy Fielding <fielding@gbiv.com>, "Julian F. Reschke" <julian.reschke@greenbytes.de>, Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com>, Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in>, Alexey Melnikov <aamelnikov@fastmail.fm>, Patrick McManus <pmcmanus@mozilla.com>, karl+rfc@la-grange.net, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <FA7FB830-FD5F-4553-9B33-BDEFF23B6A69@mnot.net>
References: <20170306054351.11A0FB82D23@rfc-editor.org>
To: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=216.86.168.182; envelope-from=mnot@mnot.net; helo=mxout-07.mxes.net
Subject: Re: [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC7232 (4957)
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/FA7FB830-FD5F-4553-9B33-BDEFF23B6A69@mnot.net>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Resent-Sender: ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org
Precedence: list

Should be REJECTED. This is a bug in the tools that convert the RFC to HTML, not the RFC itself.

Cheers,


> On 6 Mar 2017, at 4:43 pm, RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> wrote:
> 
> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC7232,
> "Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP/1.1): Conditional Requests".
> 
> --------------------------------------
> You may review the report below and at:
> http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=7232&eid=4957
> 
> --------------------------------------
> Type: Editorial
> Reported by: Karl Dubost <karl+rfc@la-grange.net>
> 
> Section: 2.3.3
> 
> Original Text
> -------------
>   Consider a resource that is subject to content negotiation (Section
>   3.4 of [RFC7231]), and where the representations sent in response to
>   a GET request vary based on the Accept-Encoding request header field
>   (Section 5.3.4 of [RFC7231]):
> 
> Corrected Text
> --------------
>   Consider a resource that is subject to content negotiation (Section
>   3.4 of [RFC7231]), and where the representations sent in response to
>   a GET request vary based on the Accept-Encoding request header field
>   (Section 5.3.4 of [RFC7231]):
> 
> Notes
> -----
> Twice the string "./rfc7231" in the links "Section 3.4" 
> before the hash sign is missing to link to the correct 
> content negotiation section.
> 
> Instructions:
> -------------
> This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please
> use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or
> rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party  
> can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary. 
> 
> --------------------------------------
> RFC7232 (draft-ietf-httpbis-p4-conditional-26)
> --------------------------------------
> Title               : Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP/1.1): Conditional Requests
> Publication Date    : June 2014
> Author(s)           : R. Fielding, Ed., J. Reschke, Ed.
> Category            : PROPOSED STANDARD
> Source              : Hypertext Transfer Protocol Bis APP
> Area                : Applications
> Stream              : IETF
> Verifying Party     : IESG

--
Mark Nottingham   https://www.mnot.net/

[Editorial Errata Reported] RFC7232 (4957) RFC Errata System
Re: [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC7232 (4957) Mark Nottingham
Re: [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC7232 (4957) Karl Dubost
Re: [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC7232 (4957) Mark Nottingham