On Thu, Aug 21, 2025 at 9:33 PM Madison Church <mchu...@staff.rfc-editor.org> wrote:
> Hi Zoltan, > > Thank you for your reply! We have updated the document based on your > response to our questions. Please see one followup query inline. Updated > files have been posted below. > > > 19) <!-- [rfced] May we update the following unordered list into a > > definition list for consistency with the rest of Section 8.2? > > > > Original: > > * uncompressed: the raw bytes > > > > * if "keep decoder", the continuation of the compressed stream > > which was interrupted at the end of the previous chunk. The > > decoder from the previous chunk must be used and its state > > it had at the end of the previous chunk must be kept at the > > start of the decoding of this chunk. > > > > * brotli: the bytes are in brotli format [RFC7932] > > > > * shared brotli: the bytes are in the shared brotli format > > specified in Section 7 > > > > Perhaps: > > uncompressed: The raw bytes. > > > > "keep decoder": If "keep decoder", the continuation of the > compressed stream > > that was interrupted at the end of the previous chunk. The > > decoder from the previous chunk must be used and its state > > it had at the end of the previous chunk must be kept at the > > start of the decoding of this chunk. > > > > brotli: The bytes are in brotli format [RFC7932]. > > > > shared brotli: The bytes are in the shared brotli format > > specified in Section 7. > > --> > > > > The original unordered list format is correct here, since only one of > these is included, depending on the CODEC bits. > > > > However, looking at this part now, the "X bytes: extra header bytes" and > "remaining bytes: the chunk contents" should be on the same indentation > level. > > Thank you for the clarification! Regarding the indentation level of "X > bytes: extra header bytes" and "remaining bytes: the chunk contents", > please let us know how the text should be aligned. (That is, should "X > bytes: extra header bytes" be indented further to align with "remaining > bytes: the chunk contents"? Or should "remaining bytes: the chunk contents" > be outdented to align with the current placement of "X bytes: extra header > bytes"?) > The "remaining bytes: the chunk contents" should be outdented to align with the current placement of "X bytes: extra header bytes". > Current: > X bytes: Extra header bytes, depending on CHUNK_TYPE. If present, > they are specified in the subsequent sections. > > remaining bytes: The chunk contents. The uncompressed data in > the chunk content depends on CHUNK_TYPE and is specified in the > subsequent sections. The compressed data has following format > depending on CODEC: > > * uncompressed: The raw bytes. > > * If "keep decoder", the continuation of the compressed stream > that was interrupted at the end of the previous chunk. The > decoder from the previous chunk must be used and its state > it had at the end of the previous chunk must be kept at the > start of the decoding of this chunk. > > * brotli: The bytes are in brotli format [RFC7932]. > > * shared brotli: The bytes are in the shared brotli format > specified in Section 7. > > > The files have been posted here (please refresh): > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9841.txt > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9841.pdf > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9841.html > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9841.xml > > The relevant diff files have been posted here (please refresh): > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9841-diff.html > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9841-rfcdiff.html (side by side) > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9841-auth48diff.html > https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9841-auth48rfcdiff.html (side by > side) > > For the AUTH48 status of this document, please see: > https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9841 > > Thank you, > Madison Church > RFC Production Center > >
-- auth48archive mailing list -- auth48archive@rfc-editor.org To unsubscribe send an email to auth48archive-le...@rfc-editor.org
