Hi Dale, Thanks for closing this out.
> I only comment on an > oddity: the version at > https://github.com/httpwg/http-extensions/blob/main/draft-ietf-httpbis-rfc6265bis.md > does not have the section numbers I recently learned that you can view a preview of current drafts within https://github.com/httpwg/http-extensions at https://httpwg.org/http-extensions/ So https://httpwg.org/http-extensions/draft-ietf-httpbis-rfc6265bis.html will show the latest updates for this spec. - Steven On Wed, Nov 19, 2025 at 10:46 AM Dale R. Worley <[email protected]> wrote: > > Steven Bingler <[email protected]> writes: > > Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2025 12:09:33 -0400 > > My apologies for not responding sooner. > > All of my concerns have been addressed. In theory, I'd like to see the > character-set issues handled according to a more consistent theory, but > we need to be upward-compatible with reality, and that makes theoretical > consistency impossible. > > > You can find all the changes in the latest draft, > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-httpbis-rfc6265bis, > > plus a recent small commit: > > https://github.com/httpwg/http-extensions/commit/59f5e21e84e19ba81eae5484a22a2ed8dec9f445 > > The latest changes do improve a number of points. I only comment on an > oddity: the version at > https://github.com/httpwg/http-extensions/blob/main/draft-ietf-httpbis-rfc6265bis.md > does not have the section numbers, which can make it hard to track > references to e.g. "section 4.1.1". > > Dale _______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
