Changeset 1772 for draft-ietf-httpbis/latest/p1-messaging.html

Timestamp:

Jul 14, 2012, 7:09:09 AM (8 years ago)

Author:

julian.reschke@…

Message:

header -> header field (#234)

File:

• draft-ietf-httpbis/latest/p1-messaging.html (modified) (13 diffs)

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

@@ -1301 +1301 @@
             (Client Error)</a> status code if the received header field(s) would be longer than the server wishes to handle.
       </p>
-      <p id="rfc.section.3.2.3.p.2">A client that receives response headers that are longer than it wishes to handle can only treat it as a server error.</p>
-      <p id="rfc.section.3.2.3.p.3">Various ad-hoc limitations on header length are found in practice. It is <em class="bcp14">RECOMMENDED</em> that all HTTP senders and recipients support messages whose combined header fields have 4000 or more octets.
+      <p id="rfc.section.3.2.3.p.2">A client that receives response header fields that are longer than it wishes to handle can only treat it as a server error.</p>
+      <p id="rfc.section.3.2.3.p.3">Various ad-hoc limitations on header field length are found in practice. It is <em class="bcp14">RECOMMENDED</em> that all HTTP senders and recipients support messages whose combined header fields have 4000 or more octets.
       </p>
       <h3 id="rfc.section.3.2.4"><a href="#rfc.section.3.2.4">3.2.4</a>&nbsp;<a id="field.components" href="#field.components">Field value components</a></h3>
@@ -1609 +1609 @@
          </li>
          <li>the trailer fields consist entirely of optional metadata, and the recipient could use the message (in a manner acceptable
-            to the server where the field originated) without receiving it. In other words, the server that generated the header (often
-            but not always the origin server) is willing to accept the possibility that the trailer fields might be silently discarded
+            to the server where the field originated) without receiving it. In other words, the server that generated the header field
+            (often but not always the origin server) is willing to accept the possibility that the trailer fields might be silently discarded
             along the path to the client.
          </li>
@@ -2976 +2976 @@
       <p id="rfc.section.A.1.2.p.2">Some clients and servers might wish to be compatible with these previous approaches to persistent connections, by explicitly
          negotiating for them with a "Connection: keep-alive" request header field. However, some experimental implementations of HTTP/1.0
-         persistent connections are faulty; for example, if a HTTP/1.0 proxy server doesn't understand <a href="#header.connection" class="smpl">Connection</a>, it will erroneously forward that header to the next inbound server, which would result in a hung connection.
-      </p>
-      <p id="rfc.section.A.1.2.p.3">One attempted solution was the introduction of a Proxy-Connection header, targeted specifically at proxies. In practice, this
-         was also unworkable, because proxies are often deployed in multiple layers, bringing about the same problem discussed above.
-      </p>
-      <p id="rfc.section.A.1.2.p.4">As a result, clients are encouraged not to send the Proxy-Connection header in any requests.</p>
+         persistent connections are faulty; for example, if a HTTP/1.0 proxy server doesn't understand <a href="#header.connection" class="smpl">Connection</a>, it will erroneously forward that header field to the next inbound server, which would result in a hung connection.
+      </p>
+      <p id="rfc.section.A.1.2.p.3">One attempted solution was the introduction of a Proxy-Connection header field, targeted specifically at proxies. In practice,
+         this was also unworkable, because proxies are often deployed in multiple layers, bringing about the same problem discussed
+         above.
+      </p>
+      <p id="rfc.section.A.1.2.p.4">As a result, clients are encouraged not to send the Proxy-Connection header field in any requests.</p>
       <p id="rfc.section.A.1.2.p.5">Clients are also encouraged to consider the use of Connection: keep-alive in requests carefully; while they can enable persistent
          connections with HTTP/1.0 servers, clients using them need will need to monitor the connection for "hung" requests (which
-         indicate that the client ought stop sending the header), and this mechanism ought not be used by clients at all when a proxy
-         is being used.
+         indicate that the client ought stop sending the header field), and this mechanism ought not be used by clients at all when
+         a proxy is being used.
       </p>
       <h3 id="rfc.section.A.1.3"><a href="#rfc.section.A.1.3">A.1.3</a>&nbsp;<a id="introduction.of.transfer-encoding" href="#introduction.of.transfer-encoding">Introduction of Transfer-Encoding</a></h3>
@@ -3258 +3259 @@
       </p>
       <ul>
-         <li>Reference RFC 3984, and update header field registrations for headers defined in this document.</li>
+         <li>Reference RFC 3984, and update header field registrations for header fields defined in this document.</li>
       </ul>
       <p id="rfc.section.C.4.p.3">Ongoing work on ABNF conversion (&lt;<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/36">http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/36</a>&gt;): 
@@ -3278 +3279 @@
          <li> &lt;<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/128">http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/128</a>&gt;: "Cite HTTPS URI scheme definition"
          </li>
-         <li> &lt;<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/129">http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/129</a>&gt;: "List-type headers vs Set-Cookie"
+         <li> &lt;<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/129">http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/129</a>&gt;: "List-type header fields vs Set-Cookie"
          </li>
       </ul>
@@ -3359 +3360 @@
       <p id="rfc.section.C.9.p.1">Closed issues: </p>
       <ul>
-         <li> &lt;<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/93">http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/93</a>&gt;: "Repeating single-value headers"
+         <li> &lt;<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/93">http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/93</a>&gt;: "Repeating single-value header fields"
          </li>
          <li> &lt;<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/131">http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/131</a>&gt;: "increase connection limit"
@@ -3393 +3394 @@
          <li> &lt;<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/60">http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/60</a>&gt;: "Placement of 13.5.1 and 13.5.2"
          </li>
-         <li> &lt;<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/200">http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/200</a>&gt;: "use of term "word" when talking about header structure"
+         <li> &lt;<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/200">http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/200</a>&gt;: "use of term "word" when talking about header field structure"
          </li>
       </ul>
@@ -3409 +3410 @@
          <li> &lt;<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/165">http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/165</a>&gt;: "Case-sensitivity of HTTP-date"
          </li>
-         <li> &lt;<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/200">http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/200</a>&gt;: "use of term "word" when talking about header structure"
+         <li> &lt;<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/200">http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/200</a>&gt;: "use of term "word" when talking about header field structure"
          </li>
       </ul>
@@ -3424 +3425 @@
          <li> &lt;<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/90">http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/90</a>&gt;: "Delimiting messages with multipart/byteranges"
          </li>
-         <li> &lt;<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/95">http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/95</a>&gt;: "Handling multiple Content-Length headers"
+         <li> &lt;<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/95">http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/95</a>&gt;: "Handling multiple Content-Length header fields"
          </li>
          <li> &lt;<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/109">http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/109</a>&gt;: "Clarify entity / representation / variant terminology"
@@ -3450 +3451 @@
       <p id="rfc.section.C.13.p.2">Partly resolved issues: </p>
       <ul>
-         <li> &lt;<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/95">http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/95</a>&gt;: "Handling multiple Content-Length headers"
+         <li> &lt;<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/95">http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/95</a>&gt;: "Handling multiple Content-Length header fields"
          </li>
       </ul>
@@ -3462 +3463 @@
          <li> &lt;<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/210">http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/210</a>&gt;: "define 'transparent' proxy"
          </li>
-         <li> &lt;<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/224">http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/224</a>&gt;: "Header Classification"
+         <li> &lt;<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/224">http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/224</a>&gt;: "Header Field Classification"
          </li>
          <li> &lt;<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/233">http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/233</a>&gt;: "Is * usable as a request-uri for new methods?"
@@ -3478 +3479 @@
          <li> &lt;<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/53">http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/53</a>&gt;: "Allow is not in 13.5.2"
          </li>
-         <li> &lt;<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/95">http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/95</a>&gt;: "Handling multiple Content-Length headers"
+         <li> &lt;<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/95">http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/95</a>&gt;: "Handling multiple Content-Length header fields"
          </li>
          <li> &lt;<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/276">http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/276</a>&gt;: "untangle ABNFs for header fields"
@@ -3514 +3515 @@
          <li> &lt;<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/186">http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/186</a>&gt;: "Document HTTP's error-handling philosophy"
          </li>
-         <li> &lt;<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/215">http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/215</a>&gt;: "Explain header registration"
+         <li> &lt;<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/215">http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/215</a>&gt;: "Explain header field registration"
          </li>
          <li> &lt;<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/219">http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/219</a>&gt;: "Revise Acknowledgements Sections"