Opened 12 years ago
Closed 12 years ago
#258 closed editorial (fixed)
Avoid passive voice in message requirements
Reported by: | mnot@… | Owned by: | |
---|---|---|---|
Priority: | normal | Milestone: | unassigned |
Component: | content-disp | Severity: | In WG Last Call |
Keywords: | Cc: |
Description
=> Parameter names MUST NOT be repeated.
The document should not phrase normative requirements in the passive voice. Instead, the document should make clear which protocol partipants are bound by each requirement. For example, this requirement probably should read "servers MUST NOT generate Content-Disposition header field values with multiple instances of the same parameter name."
Suggested:
Senders MUST NOT generate C-D header field values with multiple instances of the same parameter name.
... and look for similar constructs throughout the draft.
Change History (3)
comment:1 Changed 12 years ago by julian.reschke@…
- Resolution set to incorporated
- Status changed from new to closed
comment:2 Changed 12 years ago by mnot@…
- Resolution incorporated deleted
- Status changed from closed to reopened
comment:3 Changed 12 years ago by mnot@…
- Resolution set to fixed
- Status changed from reopened to closed
Note: See
TracTickets for help on using
tickets.
see [1073]