- From: Graham Klyne <GK@NineByNine.org>
- Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 13:18:04 +0000
- To: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
- Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
At 06:15 AM 1/16/03 -0500, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote: >I note that the reference to RFC 3066 is not yet fixed in RDF Concepts. Peter, I missed your previous comment. Thanks for raising it again. ... Brian, I think this should be fixed in LCC if possible; if not I've noted it in my issues list anyway, so it doesn't fall through the cracks. Details... At reference: http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/TR/WD-rdf-concepts-20030117/#ref-rfc-3066 In text: [[ [RFC-3066] RFC 3066 - Tags for the Identification of Languages, H. Alvestrand, IETF, January 2001. This document is http://www.isi.edu/in-notes/rfc3066.txt. ]] the phrase "RFC 3066 - Tags for the Identification of Languages" is hyperlinked to "http://www.isi.edu/in-notes/rfc2279.txt". The hyperlink *should* be to "http://www.isi.edu/in-notes/rfc3066.txt" ... Brian, this raises a general comment about RFC citations, which we (or you as series editor) might want to consider as a cleanup item in the last-call period. Proposed above is a minimal change, but I note that we're not very consistent about which of the several URLs we might use for linking to RFCs; e.g. http://rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc3066.txt ftp://ftp.rfc-editor.org/in-notes/rfc3066.txt http://ietf.org/rfc/rfc3066.txt http://www.isi.edu/in-notes/rfc3066.txt all return the same document. As all RFCs are published by the RFC editor, it might be argued that the rfc-editor.org URL (HTTP flavour) is a better choice. That is also the (HTTP) URL ultimately used by the RFC editor's search service. Should we care about this? #g ------------------- Graham Klyne <GK@NineByNine.org>
Received on Thursday, 16 January 2003 08:13:55 UTC