Ignore:
Timestamp:
Jul 14, 2012, 5:41:41 AM (7 years ago)
Author:
julian.reschke@…
Message:

Make ABNF/conformance terminology consistent (see #362)

File:
1 edited

Legend:

Unmodified
Added
Removed
  • draft-ietf-httpbis/latest/p4-conditional.html

    r1764 r1770  
    449449  }
    450450  @bottom-center {
    451        content: "Expires January 14, 2013";
     451       content: "Expires January 15, 2013";
    452452  }
    453453  @bottom-right {
     
    490490      <meta name="dct.creator" content="Reschke, J. F.">
    491491      <meta name="dct.identifier" content="urn:ietf:id:draft-ietf-httpbis-p4-conditional-latest">
    492       <meta name="dct.issued" scheme="ISO8601" content="2012-07-13">
     492      <meta name="dct.issued" scheme="ISO8601" content="2012-07-14">
    493493      <meta name="dct.replaces" content="urn:ietf:rfc:2616">
    494494      <meta name="dct.abstract" content="The Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP) is an application-level protocol for distributed, collaborative, hypertext information systems. HTTP has been in use by the World Wide Web global information initiative since 1990. This document is Part 4 of the seven-part specification that defines the protocol referred to as &#34;HTTP/1.1&#34; and, taken together, obsoletes RFC 2616. Part 4 defines request header fields for indicating conditional requests and the rules for constructing responses to those requests.">
     
    516516            </tr>
    517517            <tr>
    518                <td class="left">Expires: January 14, 2013</td>
     518               <td class="left">Expires: January 15, 2013</td>
    519519               <td class="right">J. Reschke, Editor</td>
    520520            </tr>
     
    525525            <tr>
    526526               <td class="left"></td>
    527                <td class="right">July 13, 2012</td>
     527               <td class="right">July 14, 2012</td>
    528528            </tr>
    529529         </tbody>
     
    554554         in progress”.
    555555      </p>
    556       <p>This Internet-Draft will expire on January 14, 2013.</p>
     556      <p>This Internet-Draft will expire on January 15, 2013.</p>
    557557      <h1><a id="rfc.copyrightnotice" href="#rfc.copyrightnotice">Copyright Notice</a></h1>
    558558      <p>Copyright © 2012 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved.</p>
     
    649649         in this document are to be interpreted as described in <a href="#RFC2119" id="rfc.xref.RFC2119.1"><cite title="Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels">[RFC2119]</cite></a>.
    650650      </p>
    651       <p id="rfc.section.1.1.p.2">This document defines conformance criteria for several roles in HTTP communication, including Senders, Recipients, Clients,
    652          Servers, User-Agents, Origin Servers, Intermediaries, Proxies and Gateways. See <a href="p1-messaging.html#architecture" title="Architecture">Section 2</a> of <a href="#Part1" id="rfc.xref.Part1.1"><cite title="HTTP/1.1, part 1: URIs, Connections, and Message Parsing">[Part1]</cite></a> for definitions of these terms.
    653       </p>
    654       <p id="rfc.section.1.1.p.3">An implementation is considered conformant if it complies with all of the requirements associated with its role(s). Note that
    655          SHOULD-level requirements are relevant here, unless one of the documented exceptions is applicable.
    656       </p>
    657       <p id="rfc.section.1.1.p.4">This document also uses ABNF to define valid protocol elements (<a href="#notation" title="Syntax Notation">Section&nbsp;1.2</a>). In addition to the prose requirements placed upon them, Senders <em class="bcp14">MUST NOT</em> generate protocol elements that are invalid.
    658       </p>
    659       <p id="rfc.section.1.1.p.5">Unless noted otherwise, Recipients <em class="bcp14">MUST</em> be able to parse all protocol elements matching the ABNF rules defined for them and <em class="bcp14">MAY</em> take steps to recover a usable protocol element from an invalid construct. However, HTTP does not define specific error handling
    660          mechanisms, except in cases where it has direct impact on security. This is because different uses of the protocol require
    661          different error handling strategies; for example, a Web browser might wish to transparently recover from a response where
    662          the <a href="p2-semantics.html#header.location" class="smpl">Location</a> header field doesn't parse according to the ABNF, whereby in a systems control protocol using HTTP, this type of error recovery
    663          could lead to dangerous consequences.
     651      <p id="rfc.section.1.1.p.2">This specification targets conformance criteria according to the role of a participant in HTTP communication. Hence, HTTP
     652         requirements are placed on senders, recipients, clients, servers, user agents, intermediaries, origin servers, proxies, gateways,
     653         or caches, depending on what behavior is being constrained by the requirement. See <a href="p1-messaging.html#architecture" title="Architecture">Section 2</a> of <a href="#Part1" id="rfc.xref.Part1.1"><cite title="HTTP/1.1, part 1: URIs, Connections, and Message Parsing">[Part1]</cite></a> for definitions of these terms.
     654      </p>
     655      <p id="rfc.section.1.1.p.3">The verb "generate" is used instead of "send" where a requirement differentiates between creating a protocol element and merely
     656         forwarding a received element downstream.
     657      </p>
     658      <p id="rfc.section.1.1.p.4">An implementation is considered conformant if it complies with all of the requirements associated with the roles it partakes
     659         in HTTP. Note that SHOULD-level requirements are relevant here, unless one of the documented exceptions is applicable.
     660      </p>
     661      <p id="rfc.section.1.1.p.5">This document also uses ABNF to define valid protocol elements (<a href="#notation" title="Syntax Notation">Section&nbsp;1.2</a>). In addition to the prose requirements placed upon them, senders <em class="bcp14">MUST NOT</em> generate protocol elements that do not match the grammar defined by the ABNF rules for those protocol elements that are applicable
     662         to the sender's role. If a received protocol element is processed, the recipient <em class="bcp14">MUST</em> be able to parse any value that would match the ABNF rules for that protocol element, excluding only those rules not applicable
     663         to the recipient's role.
     664      </p>
     665      <p id="rfc.section.1.1.p.6">Unless noted otherwise, a recipient <em class="bcp14">MAY</em> attempt to recover a usable protocol element from an invalid construct. HTTP does not define specific error handling mechanisms
     666         except when they have a direct impact on security, since different applications of the protocol require different error handling
     667         strategies. For example, a Web browser might wish to transparently recover from a response where the <a href="p2-semantics.html#header.location" class="smpl">Location</a> header field doesn't parse according to the ABNF, whereas a systems control client might consider any form of error recovery
     668         to be dangerous.
    664669      </p>
    665670      <h2 id="rfc.section.1.2"><a href="#rfc.section.1.2">1.2</a>&nbsp;<a id="notation" href="#notation">Syntax Notation</a></h2>
Note: See TracChangeset for help on using the changeset viewer.