Changeset 1685 for draft-ietf-httpbis/latest/p1-messaging.html

Timestamp:

22/06/12 07:32:37 (10 years ago)

Author:

julian.reschke@…

Message:

avoid the use of "may"/"should" when it could be confused with MAY/SHOULD

File:

• draft-ietf-httpbis/latest/p1-messaging.html (modified) (6 diffs)

draft-ietf-httpbis/latest/p1-messaging.html

@@ -449 +449 @@
   } 
   @bottom-center {
-       content: "Expires December 23, 2012"; 
+       content: "Expires December 24, 2012"; 
   } 
   @bottom-right {
@@ -491 +491 @@
       <meta name="dct.creator" content="Reschke, J. F.">
       <meta name="dct.identifier" content="urn:ietf:id:draft-ietf-httpbis-p1-messaging-latest">
-      <meta name="dct.issued" scheme="ISO8601" content="2012-06-21">
+      <meta name="dct.issued" scheme="ISO8601" content="2012-06-22">
       <meta name="dct.replaces" content="urn:ietf:rfc:2145">
       <meta name="dct.replaces" content="urn:ietf:rfc:2616">
@@ -523 +523 @@
             </tr>
             <tr>
-               <td class="left">Expires: December 23, 2012</td>
+               <td class="left">Expires: December 24, 2012</td>
                <td class="right">greenbytes</td>
             </tr>
             <tr>
                <td class="left"></td>
-               <td class="right">June 21, 2012</td>
+               <td class="right">June 22, 2012</td>
             </tr>
          </tbody>
@@ -545 +545 @@
       </p> 
       <h1 id="rfc.note.1"><a href="#rfc.note.1">Editorial Note (To be removed by RFC Editor)</a></h1> 
-      <p>Discussion of this draft should take place on the HTTPBIS working group mailing list (ietf-http-wg@w3.org), which is archived
+      <p>Discussion of this draft ought to take place on the HTTPBIS working group mailing list (ietf-http-wg@w3.org), which is archived
          at &lt;<a href="http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/ietf-http-wg/">http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/ietf-http-wg/</a>&gt;.
       </p>  
@@ -561 +561 @@
          in progress”.
       </p>
-      <p>This Internet-Draft will expire on December 23, 2012.</p>
+      <p>This Internet-Draft will expire on December 24, 2012.</p>
       <h1><a id="rfc.copyrightnotice" href="#rfc.copyrightnotice">Copyright Notice</a></h1>
       <p>Copyright © 2012 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved.</p>
@@ -914 +914 @@
          when transport-layer security is used to establish private communication through a shared firewall proxy.
       </p>
-      <p id="rfc.section.2.3.p.10"><span id="rfc.iref.i.3"></span><span id="rfc.iref.t.3"></span>  <span id="rfc.iref.c.3"></span> In addition, there may exist network intermediaries that are not considered part of the HTTP communication but nevertheless
+      <p id="rfc.section.2.3.p.10"><span id="rfc.iref.i.3"></span><span id="rfc.iref.t.3"></span>  <span id="rfc.iref.c.3"></span> In addition, there might exist network intermediaries that are not considered part of the HTTP communication but nevertheless
          act as filters or redirecting agents (usually violating HTTP semantics, causing security problems, and otherwise making a
          mess of things). Such a network intermediary, often referred to as an "<dfn>interception proxy</dfn>" <a href="#RFC3040" id="rfc.xref.RFC3040.1"><cite title="Internet Web Replication and Caching Taxonomy">[RFC3040]</cite></a>, "<dfn>transparent proxy</dfn>" <a href="#RFC1919" id="rfc.xref.RFC1919.1"><cite title="Classical versus Transparent IP Proxies">[RFC1919]</cite></a>, or "<dfn>captive portal</dfn>", differs from an HTTP proxy because it has not been selected by the client. Instead, the network intermediary redirects