search

SanKumar2015 / EST-coaps

EST over CoAPs IETF draft
1 stars 1 forks source link

Multiple spellings Content-Format / Content Format / content format (Esko WGLC) #118

Closed EskoDijk closed 5 years ago

EskoDijk commented 5 years ago

In text where a specific content-format is referred, e.g. "content format 281", the spelling differs. Suggest to use one preferred spelling for it.

E.g. use "Content-Format" when referring to the Option, and use "content-format" when referring to the conceptual content-format not the Option. Sometimes it is hard to get it right; I can say "content-format 281" (when talking about that value) or "Content-Format 281" (when talking about an Option with that value).

petervanderstok commented 5 years ago

changed them all to Content-Format. It is really confusing to make the suggested difference.

csosto-pk commented 5 years ago

Chose to go with "Content-Format" as in RFC7252.