RFC Errata
Found 2 records.
Status: Verified (2)
RFC 5861, "HTTP Cache-Control Extensions for Stale Content", May 2010
Source of RFC: INDEPENDENT
Errata ID: 2255
Status: Verified
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Alfred Hoenes
Date Reported: 2010-05-13
Verifier Name: Nevil Brownlee
Date Verified: 2013-03-16
Section 3, pg.3 says:
Note that this directive does not affect freshness; stale cached responses that are used SHOULD still be visibly stale when sent | (i.e., have a non-zero Age header and a warning header, as per HTTP's | requirements).
It should say:
Note that this directive does not affect freshness; stale cached responses that are used SHOULD still be visibly stale when sent | (i.e., have a non-zero Age header field and a Warning header field, as per HTTP's requirements). ^^^^^^ ^ ^^^^^^
Notes:
Rationale:
- inconsistent use of standard terminology, and
- inconsistent capitalization of header field names.
(These issues recur in the last paragraph of Section 4.)
Errata ID: 2256
Status: Verified
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Alfred Hoenes
Date Reported: 2010-05-13
Verifier Name: Nevil Brownlee
Date Verified: 2013-03-16
Section 4, pg.4 says:
Note that this directive does not affect freshness; stale cached responses that are used SHOULD still be visibly stale when sent | (i.e., have a non-zero Age header and a warning header, as per HTTP's requirements).
It should say:
Note that this directive does not affect freshness; stale cached responses that are used SHOULD still be visibly stale when sent | (i.e., have a non-zero Age header field and a Warning header field, as per HTTP's requirements). ^^^^^^ ^ ^^^^^^
Notes:
Rationale:
- inconsistent use of standard terminology, and
- inconsistent capitalization of header field names.
(Similar issues as for section 3 -- cf. EID=2255.)