Re: [i47] inconsistency in date format explanation

From: Frank Ellermann <nobody@xyzzy.claranet.de> Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2007 16:21:34 +0100 To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org Message-ID: <fgnce8$gve$1@ger.gmane.org> · This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 6 June 2008 08:04:33 GMT

Roy T. Fielding wrote:

> the RFC editor saw the reference to RFC 850 and determined that
> we cannot refer to an obsoleted RFC

Informative references to an obsoleted RFC should be okay, if the
status "obsolete" is obvious.  

For an approved RFC in the editor queue referencing RFC 850 compare
<http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-usefor-usefor-12#section-7.2>.

IANA got the idea and registered Date-Received specified in RFC 850
as obsolete header field: 
<http://www.iana.org/assignments/message-headers/perm-headers.html>

 Frank