Subject: [quicwg/base-drafts] Fix bit prefix verbiage to match figure (#1537)

From: Dmitri Tikhonov <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 07 Jul 2018 19:11:31 -0700

You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at:

  https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/1537

-- Commit Summary --

  * Fix bit prefix verbiage to match figure

-- File Changes --

    M draft-ietf-quic-qpack.md (4)

-- Patch Links --

https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/1537.patch
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/1537.diff

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/1537

---

From: Martin Thomson <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 08 Jul 2018 17:59:38 -0700

martinthomson approved this pull request.

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/1537#pullrequestreview-135253931

---

From: Mike Bishop <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2018 14:59:26 -0700

No, the existing text is correct and the change is incorrect.  The `H` bit is part of the string prefix, so the string prefix is one bit longer than the string's length field.  See the definition of prefixed strings in 5.1.2.

However, I hate how confusing that terminology is, so if you'd like to propose an improvement to that, *please*.  ;-)

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/1537#issuecomment-403633872

---

From: Dmitri Tikhonov <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2018 15:14:06 -0700

Sure confused me!  I'll have to reread it.

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/1537#issuecomment-403637270

---

From: Martin Thomson <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2018 16:17:52 -0700

Right.  Perhaps it would be better to say "a string literal with an N-bit-prefixed length" or something like that.

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/1537#issuecomment-403649417

---

From: Dmitri Tikhonov <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2018 06:17:52 -0700

Closed #1537.

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/1537#event-1725492372

---

From: Dmitri Tikhonov <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2018 06:17:52 -0700

Having read the document again, I think it is fine as-is. The prefix is described in the _String Literals_ section which comes before the operation definitions and the accompanying figures.

Closing.

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/1537#issuecomment-403818393