W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > uri@w3.org > June 2007

Re: rfc4622bis: review requested

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Thu, 07 Jun 2007 20:32:17 +0200
Message-ID: <46684F31.8000802@gmx.de>
To: Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@jabber.org>
CC: uri@w3.org, uri-review@ietf.org

Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> As previously pointed out, there are some errors in RFC 4622. I have
> attempted to correct them here:
> 
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-saintandre-rfc4622bis-00.txt
> 
> No one has told me there are errors in rfc4622bis, but since Roy
> Fielding said RFC 4622 is broken and should be removed from the
> standards track [1] I want to make sure that my attempted corrections 
> are indeed correct.
> 
> Unless I receive feedback that rfc4622bis does not fix the problems with
> RFC 4622, I will assume that it does, complete another pass through the
> document to ensure that it is as correct as I can make it, then request
> a standards action from the appropriate AD.
> 
> Thanks!

(1) I think you should have a section stating what the changes are.

(2) Independently of that, a diff to RFC4622 would be useful, such as in 
<http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/rfcdiff.pyht?url1=http://tools.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4622.txt&url2=http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-saintandre-rfc4622bis-00.txt>.

(3) 
<http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-saintandre-rfc4622bis-00#section-3.8> 
says: "See Section 5 of RFC 4622, Security Considerations." There may be 
other instances like that.

(4) Front matter should say: "Obsoletes: 4622".

Best regards, Julian
Received on Thursday, 7 June 2007 18:32:34 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 13 January 2011 12:15:36 GMT