Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Prioritization edits (#2322)

[Mike Bishop <[e-mail]>]

MikeBishop commented on this pull request.

I think the rearrangement is good, but the most awkward paragraph is only moved, not changed.  If you want to clean up this section, maybe try to untangle the paragraph that's now at 1075-1080?

>  
 Due to reordering between streams, an element can also be prioritized which is
 not yet in the tree. Such elements are added to the tree with the requested
 priority.
 
+

Extra blank line here.

>  
 Due to reordering between streams, an element can also be prioritized which is
 not yet in the tree. Such elements are added to the tree with the requested
 priority.
 
+
+In all cases, elements are assigned an initial weight of 16 unless a PRIORITY
+frame begins the stream.

That's only possible for request streams.

>  
 Due to reordering between streams, an element can also be prioritized which is
 not yet in the tree. Such elements are added to the tree with the requested
 priority.
 
+
+In all cases, elements are assigned an initial weight of 16 unless a PRIORITY
+frame begins the stream.
+
+When a client request is first sent, its parent and weight are determined by the
+PRIORITY frame (see {{frame-priority}}) which begins the stream, if present.
+Otherwise, the element is dependent on the root of the priority tree. A request 
+stream dependent upon another request stream expresses the preference that the
+latter stream (the "parent" request) be allocated resources before the former
+stream (the "dependent" request).

This paragraph feels like the thing that needs improvement in this section.

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/2322#pullrequestreview-190851773