Changes between Version 15 and Version 17 of Ticket #502


Ignore:
Timestamp:
04/11/13 23:31:09 (6 years ago)
Author:
fielding@…
Comment:

In Section 6.1:

"Recipients that trigger certain connection behavior based on the presence of connection options MUST do so based on the presence of the connection-option rather than only the presence of the optional header field. In other words, if the connection option is received as a header field but not indicated within the Connection field-value, then the recipient MUST ignore the connection-specific header field because it has likely been forwarded by an intermediary that is only partially conformant.

I am flagging the usage of a requirement followed by the "must ignore" requirement as an issue as the "in other words" suggest that it is a clarification of the first requirement.

Rewritten as a single ought, with explanation, in [2471].

Legend:

Unmodified
Added
Removed
Modified
  • Ticket #502 – Description

    v15 v17  
    3838----
    3939
    40 In Section 6.1:
     40~~In Section 6.1:~~
    4141
    42   "Recipients that trigger certain connection behavior based on the presence of connection options MUST do so based on the presence of the connection-option rather than only the presence of the   optional header field.  In other words, if the connection option is received as a header field but not indicated within the Connection field-value, then the recipient MUST ignore the connection-specific header field because it has likely been forwarded by an intermediary that is only partially conformant.
     42~~  "Recipients that trigger certain connection behavior based on the presence of connection options MUST do so based on the presence of the connection-option rather than only the presence of the   optional header field.  In other words, if the connection option is received as a header field but not indicated within the Connection field-value, then the recipient MUST ignore the connection-specific header field because it has likely been forwarded by an intermediary that is only partially conformant.~~
    4343
    44 I am flagging the usage of a requirement followed by the "must ignore" requirement as an issue as the "in other words" suggest that it is a clarification of the first requirement.
     44~~I am flagging the usage of a requirement followed by the "must ignore" requirement as an issue as the "in other words" suggest that it is a clarification of the first requirement.~~
    4545
    4646----