W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > uri@w3.org > September 2004

Re: draft-06 plus last-call changes

From: Mike Brown <mike@skew.org>
Date: Thu, 9 Sep 2004 14:21:34 -0600 (MDT)
Message-Id: <200409092021.i89KLYVJ055234@chilled.skew.org>
To: uri@w3.org

Roy T. Fielding wrote:
> Please review.

I'd like to see the 2nd paragraph in the Introduction ("This document 
obsoletes [RFC2396]...") explicitly state whether the specs that reference RFC 
2396 are expected to conform to RFC 2396bis in whole or in part, or whether 
such conformance is deferred until those specs themselves are revised.

I am somewhat confused about this issue, because previous discussions on the 
list led me to believe, for example, that the algorithm for resolving relative 
reference to absolute form would be applicable immediately, whereas more 
recently it was mentioned that RFC 2396's BNF productions would have to remain 
in effect as well, for the benefit of the standards that rely on them.

RFC 2026 sec. 6.3 says:

   A new version of an established Internet Standard must progress
   through the full Internet standardization process as if it were a
   completely new specification.  Once the new version has reached the
   Standard level, it will usually replace the previous version, which
   will be moved to Historic status.  However, in some cases both
   versions may remain as Internet Standards to honor the requirements
   of an installed base.  In this situation, the relationship between
   the previous and the new versions must be explicitly stated in the
   text of the new version or in another appropriate document (e.g., an
   Applicability Statement; see section 3.2).

Given that RFC 2396bis's Introduction says it obsoletes RFC 2396, I assume the 
intent is to move RFC 2396 to Historic, and thus (according to RFC 2026 sec. 
4.2) non-Internet Standard status.  While an explicit statement would not be 
necessary in this case, I think it would be helpful for implementers of other 
standards that depend on RFC 2396 to know whether those standards are 
inherently obsolete, or are their requirements automatically changed to RFC 
2396bis (or certain sections thereof), or is it at their discretion, or what.

RFC 2026 doesn't seem to take any particular position regarding what happens 
to standards that depend on a standard that is moved to Historic status, but 
does say

   "Standards track specifications normally must not depend on
   other standards track specifications which are at a lower maturity
   level or on non standards track specifications..."

which may or may not have any bearing on the issue.

-Mike
Received on Thursday, 9 September 2004 20:21:32 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 13 January 2011 12:15:34 GMT