W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > April 2012

Re: ACTION-687: Please help me remember what this one is about

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2012 10:35:37 +0200
Message-ID: <4F9908D9.4030909@gmx.de>
To: Robin Berjon <robin@berjon.com>
CC: "www-tag@w3.org List" <www-tag@w3.org>, Ian Jacobs <ij@W3.org>
On 2012-04-26 10:24, Robin Berjon wrote:
> On Apr 26, 2012, at 07:51 , Julian Reschke wrote:
>> On 2012-04-25 22:56, Robin Berjon wrote:
>>>> Further more>if<   the reference is to an IETF document for which the link will go 404 after the document expires, then I don't think that would be particularly defensible in a REC (not sure that's the case here, but links from a rec should be to documents that will, with high probability, remain accessible far into the future, IMO.)
>>>
>>> If IETF does indeed mint uncool URIs it's certainly a problem, but I would expect that problem to be taken to the IETF. As things stand though, the draft has expired but the link still works.
>>> ...
>>
>> The spec uses a URI on tools.ietf.org, which is *not* the official IETF URI for an internet draft.
>
> That's clearly a spec bug :) I'd recommend editing in place (but that's not a TAG decision to make).

Just for the record: the tools.ietf.org variants are a lot more useful 
to point to, as they provide a slightly HTML-ized variant with useful 
anchors. So I was pointing this out just in order to explain why it 
doesn't 404.

Best regards, Julian
Received on Thursday, 26 April 2012 08:36:13 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 12:48:53 GMT