Changeset 138 for draft-ietf-httpbis/latest/p3-payload.html

Timestamp:

Jan 3, 2008, 10:03:02 AM (12 years ago)

Author:

julian.reschke@…

Message:

Make the historical change information (RFC2068 -> RFC2616) complete again.

File:

• draft-ietf-httpbis/latest/p3-payload.html (modified) (3 diffs)

draft-ietf-httpbis/latest/p3-payload.html

@@ -1458 +1458 @@
       <h1 id="rfc.section.C"><a href="#rfc.section.C">C.</a>&nbsp;<a id="compatibility" href="#compatibility">Compatibility with Previous Versions</a></h1>
       <h2 id="rfc.section.C.1"><a href="#rfc.section.C.1">C.1</a>&nbsp;<a id="changes.from.rfc.2068" href="#changes.from.rfc.2068">Changes from RFC 2068</a></h2>
-      <p id="rfc.section.C.1.p.1">Charset wildcarding is introduced to avoid explosion of character set names in accept headers. (<a href="#header.accept-charset" id="rfc.xref.header.accept-charset.2" title="Accept-Charset">Section&nbsp;5.2</a>)
-      </p>
-      <p id="rfc.section.C.1.p.2">Content-Base was deleted from the specification: it was not implemented widely, and there is no simple, safe way to introduce
+      <p id="rfc.section.C.1.p.1">Transfer-coding and message lengths all interact in ways that required fixing exactly when chunked encoding is used (to allow
+         for transfer encoding that may not be self delimiting); it was important to straighten out exactly how message lengths are
+         computed. (<a href="#entity.length" title="Entity Length">Section&nbsp;3.2.2</a>, see also <a href="#Part1" id="rfc.xref.Part1.5"><cite title="HTTP/1.1, part 1: URIs, Connections, and Message Parsing">[Part1]</cite></a>, <a href="#Part5" id="rfc.xref.Part5.3"><cite title="HTTP/1.1, part 5: Range Requests and Partial Responses">[Part5]</cite></a> and <a href="#Part6" id="rfc.xref.Part6.4"><cite title="HTTP/1.1, part 6: Caching">[Part6]</cite></a>).
+      </p>
+      <p id="rfc.section.C.1.p.2">Charset wildcarding is introduced to avoid explosion of character set names in accept headers. (<a href="#header.accept-charset" id="rfc.xref.header.accept-charset.2" title="Accept-Charset">Section&nbsp;5.2</a>)
+      </p>
+      <p id="rfc.section.C.1.p.3">Content-Base was deleted from the specification: it was not implemented widely, and there is no simple, safe way to introduce
          it without a robust extension mechanism. In addition, it is used in a similar, but not identical fashion in MHTML <a href="#RFC2557" id="rfc.xref.RFC2557.2"><cite title="MIME Encapsulation of Aggregate Documents, such as HTML (MHTML)">[RFC2557]</cite></a>.
       </p>
-      <p id="rfc.section.C.1.p.3">A content-coding of "identity" was introduced, to solve problems discovered in caching. (<a href="#content.codings" title="Content Codings">Section&nbsp;2.2</a>)
-      </p>
-      <p id="rfc.section.C.1.p.4">Quality Values of zero should indicate that "I don't want something" to allow clients to refuse a representation. (<a href="#quality.values" title="Quality Values">Section&nbsp;2.4</a>)
-      </p>
-      <p id="rfc.section.C.1.p.5">The Alternates<span id="rfc.iref.a.5"></span><span id="rfc.iref.h.11"></span>, Content-Version<span id="rfc.iref.c.8"></span><span id="rfc.iref.h.12"></span>, Derived-From<span id="rfc.iref.d.2"></span><span id="rfc.iref.h.13"></span>, Link<span id="rfc.iref.l.1"></span><span id="rfc.iref.h.14"></span>, URI<span id="rfc.iref.u.1"></span><span id="rfc.iref.h.15"></span>, Public<span id="rfc.iref.p.1"></span><span id="rfc.iref.h.16"></span> and Content-Base<span id="rfc.iref.c.9"></span><span id="rfc.iref.h.17"></span> header fields were defined in previous versions of this specification, but not commonly implemented. See <a href="#RFC2068" id="rfc.xref.RFC2068.5"><cite title="Hypertext Transfer Protocol -- HTTP/1.1">[RFC2068]</cite></a>.
+      <p id="rfc.section.C.1.p.4">A content-coding of "identity" was introduced, to solve problems discovered in caching. (<a href="#content.codings" title="Content Codings">Section&nbsp;2.2</a>)
+      </p>
+      <p id="rfc.section.C.1.p.5">Quality Values of zero should indicate that "I don't want something" to allow clients to refuse a representation. (<a href="#quality.values" title="Quality Values">Section&nbsp;2.4</a>)
+      </p>
+      <p id="rfc.section.C.1.p.6">The Alternates<span id="rfc.iref.a.5"></span><span id="rfc.iref.h.11"></span>, Content-Version<span id="rfc.iref.c.8"></span><span id="rfc.iref.h.12"></span>, Derived-From<span id="rfc.iref.d.2"></span><span id="rfc.iref.h.13"></span>, Link<span id="rfc.iref.l.1"></span><span id="rfc.iref.h.14"></span>, URI<span id="rfc.iref.u.1"></span><span id="rfc.iref.h.15"></span>, Public<span id="rfc.iref.p.1"></span><span id="rfc.iref.h.16"></span> and Content-Base<span id="rfc.iref.c.9"></span><span id="rfc.iref.h.17"></span> header fields were defined in previous versions of this specification, but not commonly implemented. See <a href="#RFC2068" id="rfc.xref.RFC2068.5"><cite title="Hypertext Transfer Protocol -- HTTP/1.1">[RFC2068]</cite></a>.
       </p>
       <h2 id="rfc.section.C.2"><a href="#rfc.section.C.2">C.2</a>&nbsp;<a id="changes.from.rfc.2616" href="#changes.from.rfc.2616">Changes from RFC 2616</a></h2>
@@ -1643 +1647 @@
             </li>
             <li class="indline0"><a id="rfc.index.P" href="#rfc.index.P"><b>P</b></a><ul class="ind">
-                  <li class="indline1"><em>Part1</em>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a class="iref" href="#rfc.xref.Part1.1">3.1</a>, <a class="iref" href="#rfc.xref.Part1.2">3.2</a>, <a class="iref" href="#rfc.xref.Part1.3">3.2.2</a>, <a class="iref" href="#Part1"><b>9.1</b></a>, <a class="iref" href="#rfc.xref.Part1.4">A.5</a><ul class="ind">
+                  <li class="indline1"><em>Part1</em>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a class="iref" href="#rfc.xref.Part1.1">3.1</a>, <a class="iref" href="#rfc.xref.Part1.2">3.2</a>, <a class="iref" href="#rfc.xref.Part1.3">3.2.2</a>, <a class="iref" href="#Part1"><b>9.1</b></a>, <a class="iref" href="#rfc.xref.Part1.4">A.5</a>, <a class="iref" href="#rfc.xref.Part1.5">C.1</a><ul class="ind">
                         <li class="indline1"><em>Section 4.3</em>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a class="iref" href="#rfc.xref.Part1.2">3.2</a></li>
                         <li class="indline1"><em>Section 4.4</em>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a class="iref" href="#rfc.xref.Part1.3">3.2.2</a></li>
@@ -1659 +1663 @@
                      </ul>
                   </li>
-                  <li class="indline1"><em>Part5</em>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a class="iref" href="#rfc.xref.Part5.1">2.3.2</a>, <a class="iref" href="#rfc.xref.Part5.2">3.1</a>, <a class="iref" href="#Part5"><b>9.1</b></a><ul class="ind">
+                  <li class="indline1"><em>Part5</em>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a class="iref" href="#rfc.xref.Part5.1">2.3.2</a>, <a class="iref" href="#rfc.xref.Part5.2">3.1</a>, <a class="iref" href="#Part5"><b>9.1</b></a>, <a class="iref" href="#rfc.xref.Part5.3">C.1</a><ul class="ind">
                         <li class="indline1"><em>Section 5.2</em>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a class="iref" href="#rfc.xref.Part5.2">3.1</a></li>
                         <li class="indline1"><em>Section A</em>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a class="iref" href="#rfc.xref.Part5.1">2.3.2</a></li>
                      </ul>
                   </li>
-                  <li class="indline1"><em>Part6</em>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a class="iref" href="#rfc.xref.Part6.1">3.1</a>, <a class="iref" href="#rfc.xref.Part6.2">4.1</a>, <a class="iref" href="#rfc.xref.Part6.3">5.7</a>, <a class="iref" href="#Part6"><b>9.1</b></a><ul class="ind">
+                  <li class="indline1"><em>Part6</em>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a class="iref" href="#rfc.xref.Part6.1">3.1</a>, <a class="iref" href="#rfc.xref.Part6.2">4.1</a>, <a class="iref" href="#rfc.xref.Part6.3">5.7</a>, <a class="iref" href="#Part6"><b>9.1</b></a>, <a class="iref" href="#rfc.xref.Part6.4">C.1</a><ul class="ind">
                         <li class="indline1"><em>Section 2.6</em>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a class="iref" href="#rfc.xref.Part6.3">5.7</a></li>
                         <li class="indline1"><em>Section 3.3</em>&nbsp;&nbsp;<a class="iref" href="#rfc.xref.Part6.1">3.1</a></li>