on 2007-02-19 21:57 Spencer Dawkins said the following:
> I have been selected as the General Area Review Team (Gen-ART)
> reviewer for this draft (for background on Gen-ART, please see
> http://www.alvestrand.no/ietf/gen/art/gen-art-FAQ.html).
...
> 3. Fragment Identification Syntax
>
> The syntax for the fragment identifiers is straightforward. The
> syntax defines four schemes, 'char', 'line', 'match', and hash (which
> can either be 'length' or 'md5'). The 'char' and 'line' schemes can
> be used in two different variants, either the position variant (with
> a single number), or the range variant (with two comma-separated
> numbers). The 'match' scheme has a regular expression as its
> parameter, which must be specified as a string with escaped
> semicolons (because the semicolon is used to concatenate multiple
> fragment identification scheme parts). The hash scheme can either
> use the 'length' or the 'md5' scheme to specify a hash value.
>
> Spencer: The use of the word "hash" to describe the length of a resource in
> characters violates the Principle of Least Astonishment. Could "length" and
> "md5" not be grouped together, just for ease of understanding?
I read an earlier versions of this draft a couple of years ago, and sent
some feedback to the author. I clearly remember being astonished when
reading Section 3.2, "Hash Sums", and finding 'length' in there. I would
also, as Spencer, appreciate a separation of the description of hashes
(MD5) and length robustifiers (maybe into separate sections), and the
associated changes in the rest of the draft needed to not use 'hash' as
a term which includes the fragment length indication.
Henrik
_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
