Changeset 2085 for draft-ietf-httpbis/latest

Timestamp:

05/01/13 08:35:43 (10 years ago)

Author:

fielding@…

Message:

(editorial) Suggest that proposals for new status codes use a pseudonym like 4NN until there is consensus for registration; addresses #404

Location:

draft-ietf-httpbis/latest

Files:

• p2-semantics.html (modified) (1 diff)
• p2-semantics.xml (modified) (1 diff)

draft-ietf-httpbis/latest/p2-semantics.html

@@ -3236 +3236 @@
          mandate a zero-length payload body.
       </p>
-      <p id="rfc.section.8.2.2.p.3">A definition for a new status code ought to explain the request conditions that would cause a response containing that status
+      <p id="rfc.section.8.2.2.p.3">Proposals for new status codes that are not yet widely deployed ought to avoid allocating a specific number for the code until
+         there is clear consensus that it will be registered; instead, early drafts can use a notation such as "4NN", or "3N0" .. "3N9",
+         to indicate the class of the proposed status code(s) without consuming a number prematurely.
+      </p>
+      <p id="rfc.section.8.2.2.p.4">A definition for a new status code ought to explain the request conditions that would cause a response containing that status
          code (e.g., combinations of request header fields and/or method(s)) along with any dependencies on response header fields
          (e.g., what fields are required, what fields can modify the semantics, and what header field semantics are further refined
          when used with the new status code).
       </p>
-      <p id="rfc.section.8.2.2.p.4">A response that can transfer a payload ought to specify expected cache behavior (e.g., cacheability and freshness criteria,
+      <p id="rfc.section.8.2.2.p.5">A response that can transfer a payload ought to specify expected cache behavior (e.g., cacheability and freshness criteria,
          as described in <a href="#Part6" id="rfc.xref.Part6.15"><cite title="Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP/1.1): Caching">[Part6]</cite></a>) and whether the payload has any implied association with an identified resource (<a href="#identifying.payload" title="Identifying a Representation">Section&nbsp;3.1.4.1</a>).
       </p>

draft-ietf-httpbis/latest/p2-semantics.xml

@@ -4174 +4174 @@
 </t>
 <t>
+   Proposals for new status codes that are not yet widely deployed ought to
+   avoid allocating a specific number for the code until there is clear
+   consensus that it will be registered; instead, early drafts can use a
+   notation such as "4NN", or "3N0" .. "3N9", to indicate the class
+   of the proposed status code(s) without consuming a number prematurely.
+</t>
+<t>
    A definition for a new status code ought to explain the request
    conditions that would cause a response containing that status code (e.g.,