[hybi] thewebsocketprotocol #41 (new): Use URI/IRI terminology
"hybi issue tracker" <trac@tools.ietf.org> Wed, 16 February 2011 02:35 UTC
Return-Path: <trac@tools.ietf.org>
X-Original-To: hybi@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: hybi@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED1453A6C26 for <hybi@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 15 Feb 2011 18:35:33 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -101.656
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.656 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.921, BAYES_00=-2.599, FRT_LOLITA1=1.865, NO_RELAYS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id hJqOev+hmWvw for <hybi@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 15 Feb 2011 18:35:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: from zinfandel.tools.ietf.org (unknown [IPv6:2001:1890:1112:1::2a]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 44C463A6C21 for <hybi@ietf.org>; Tue, 15 Feb 2011 18:35:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=zinfandel.tools.ietf.org) by zinfandel.tools.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <trac@tools.ietf.org>) id 1PpXFH-00043k-UF; Tue, 15 Feb 2011 18:35:59 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
From: hybi issue tracker <trac@tools.ietf.org>
X-Trac-Version: 0.11.7
Precedence: bulk
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
X-Mailer: Trac 0.11.7, by Edgewall Software
To: sm+ietf@elandsys.com
X-Trac-Project: hybi
Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2011 02:35:59 -0000
X-URL: http://tools.ietf.org/hybi/
X-Trac-Ticket-URL: http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/hybi/trac/ticket/41
Message-ID: <059.f762b4dde4d9971f23da8c744849c3e8@tools.ietf.org>
X-Trac-Ticket-ID: 41
X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: ::1
X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: sm+ietf@elandsys.com, hybi@ietf.org
X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: trac@tools.ietf.org
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on zinfandel.tools.ietf.org); SAEximRunCond expanded to false
Cc: hybi@ietf.org
Subject: [hybi] thewebsocketprotocol #41 (new): Use URI/IRI terminology
X-BeenThere: hybi@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
List-Id: Server-Initiated HTTP <hybi.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hybi>, <mailto:hybi-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/hybi>
List-Post: <mailto:hybi@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:hybi-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hybi>, <mailto:hybi-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2011 02:35:34 -0000
#41: Use URI/IRI terminology This issue was reported by Julian Reschke. http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-hybi- thewebsocketprotocol-05#section-3 The spec should use terminology consistent with RFC 3986/7, that it, use "URI" and/or "IRI". According to 10.1 it appears to be a URI. Also, it should be checked whether sections 3.1/3.2 add anything over the relevant parts of RFC 3986. If they do, we need to understand what. If they do not, the sections should either be removed, or simplified to just reference RFC 3986. -- ----------------------------------+----------------------------------------- Reporter: sm+ietf@… | Owner: Type: defect | Status: new Priority: major | Milestone: Component: thewebsocketprotocol | Version: Severity: - | Keywords: ----------------------------------+----------------------------------------- Ticket URL: <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/hybi/trac/ticket/41> hybi <http://tools.ietf.org/hybi/> The Hypertext-Bidirectional (HyBi) working group will seek standardization of one approach to maintain bidirectional communications between the HTTP client, server and intermediate entities, which will provide more efficiency compared to the current use of hanging requests.
- [hybi] thewebsocketprotocol #41 (new): Use URI/IR… hybi issue tracker
- Re: [hybi] #41: Use URI/IRI terminology hybi issue tracker