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 _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf