Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Clarify when a dynamic table entry can be evicted. (#2261)

[Martin Thomson <[e-mail]>]

martinthomson approved this pull request.

Some stylistic changes as suggestions (damn I wish GitHub supported multi-line suggestions), but this is generally much better.

> @@ -210,10 +210,18 @@ acknowledged by the decoder.
 
 ### Blocked Dynamic Table Insertions {#blocked-insertion}
 
+The encoder considers a dynamic table entry to be blocking if it has not yet
+received acknowledgement of insertion of the entry, or if it has not yet
+received acknowledgement of all references to the entry.  Note that a dynamic
+table entry that has never been referenced can still be blocking.  Also note

This "Note that" sentence is redundant.

> @@ -210,10 +210,18 @@ acknowledged by the decoder.
 
 ### Blocked Dynamic Table Insertions {#blocked-insertion}
 
+The encoder considers a dynamic table entry to be blocking if it has not yet
+received acknowledgement of insertion of the entry, or if it has not yet
+received acknowledgement of all references to the entry.  Note that a dynamic
+table entry that has never been referenced can still be blocking.  Also note
+that a blocking entry cannot be evicted, which is unrelated to a blocked stream,

Suggest: 
```
A blocking entry cannot be evicted until its insertion has been acknowledged and there are no unacknowledged references to the entry outstanding.
--new paragraph
Note:
: A blocking entry is unrelated to a blocked stream, where a decoder cannot decode a stream as a result of references to entries that are not yet available.  An encoder that uses the dynamic table has to manage the possibility of blocked entries, whereas a decoder can forbid an encoder from making references to unacknowledged entries.
```

>  An encoder MUST NOT insert an entry into the dynamic table (or duplicate an
-existing entry) if doing so would evict an entry with unacknowledged references.
-For header blocks that might rely on the newly added entry, the encoder can use
-a literal representation.
+existing entry) if doing so would evict a blocking entry.  For header blocks
+that would rely on the newly added entry, the encoder can instead use a literal

Not your text, but if we're talking about not being able to insert, then this really needs to say something like: An encoder that cannot insert entries in the dynamic table sends literal representations of header fields.

> @@ -324,10 +332,9 @@ permit the encoder to track the decoder's state.  These events are:
 
 Knowledge that a header block with references to the dynamic table has been
 processed permits the encoder to evict entries to which no unacknowledged
-references remain, regardless of whether those references were potentially
-blocking (see {{blocked-insertion}}).  When a stream is reset or abandoned, the
-indication that these header blocks will never be processed serves a similar
-function; see {{stream-cancellation}}.
+references remain; see {{blocked-insertion}}.  When a stream is reset or

Style nit: I think that we've been using the parenthetical form for this sort of reference.  I think that this is right, even the semi-colon, which I initially stumbled over, but consistency is somewhat important.

-- 
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/2261#pullrequestreview-195765011