At 11:44 14-09-2012, The IESG wrote:
The IESG has received a request from an individual submitter to consider
the following document:
- 'Prefer Header for HTTP'
<draft-snell-http-prefer-14.txt> as Proposed Standard
The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
final comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the
ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org mailing lists by 2012-10-12. Exceptionally, comments
may be
I took a quick look at the draft.
In the Abstract:
"This specification defines an HTTP header field that can be used by a
client to request that certain behaviors be implemented by a server
while processing a request."
The "request that certain behaviors be implemented by a server"
sounds odd. The "employ" from the Introduction section is a better fit.
In Section 2:
"A server that does not recognize or is unable to comply with
particular preference tokens in the Prefer header field of a request
MUST ignore those tokens and MUST NOT stop processing or signal an
error."
Suggested text:
A server that does not recognize or is unable to comply with
particular preference tokens in the Prefer header field of a request
MUST ignore those tokens and continue processing instead of signalling
an error.
In Section 4.1:
"Registration requests consist of the completed registration template
below, typically published in an RFC or Open Standard (in the sense
described by Section 7 of [RFC2026])."
Is it necessary to get into the details of the Specification Required
policy? "Permanent and readily available public specification" would
be better than the reference to RFC 2026.
BTW, the RFC 5023 informative reference is missing.
Regards,
-sm