Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Attempt to complete p:http-request #346

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Jan 29, 2020
Merged

Conversation

@ndw
Copy link
Collaborator

ndw commented Jan 29, 2020

Right. Here's my attempt to complete the p:http-request step. I made an editorial pass, hopefully my edits are acceptable. I made a few non-editorial change as well:

  1. I removed the reference to certificates. I don't know how to write that section and I don't think we have to. We say that implementations may support additional auth-methods. Certificates can be one of them and we can come back to standardize later if we need to.
  2. I renamed "multipart" to "accept-multipart"
  3. I added "multipart-boundary"
  4. I added "multipart-content-type"
  5. I renamed the "content-encoding" parameter to "override-content-encoding" as I think it's parallel with "override-content-type".
  6. I changed the "timeout" from decimal to integer because that seemed more consistent.
  7. I attempt to write the sections about how multipart requests and responses are handled.

There a at least a half dozen or so places where we either explicitly or implicitly say "must" and haven't given an error code for what to do if that's not possible. I didn't try to fill all of those in as I don't think they're substantive.

Here's a formatted draft

Comments, etc. Most welcome.

@ndw ndw requested a review from xproc/spec-authors Jan 29, 2020
@xml-project

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

xml-project commented Jan 29, 2020

Great! Will have a look on it this afternoon.

Copy link
Contributor

xml-project left a comment

I do agree with your general remark on errors. However at least in the following situation, a specific error code for each situation seems reasonable to me:

  1. Http version not unknown or not supported.
  2. Multipart-boundary starts with "--"
  3. Multipart-content-type is not a multipart content type.
  4. transfer-encoding with an unknown or unsupported method.

To my reading, any of this situation will lead to an error. If we do not specify an error code, the generic error (XD0030) needs to be raised. This would be very unhandy for p:catch, because authors could not react to the underlying error.

I volunteer to make this changes over the weekend.

The uppercase-/lowercase question: I don't care. Someboy said uppercase, so I wrote "uppercase". If anyone feals comfortable with lowercase: Yeah, let's go for lowercase.

@ndw

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

ndw commented Jan 29, 2020

I agree about errors. And I agree that the prose needs another pass for them, thanks Achim!

@ndw ndw merged commit 5df1001 into xproc:master Jan 29, 2020
1 check passed
1 check passed
continuous-integration/travis-ci/pr The Travis CI build passed
Details
@ndw ndw deleted the ndw:http-request-editorial branch Jan 29, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Linked issues

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants
You can’t perform that action at this time.