W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-xml-linking-comments@w3.org > January to March 2000

nits with XLink & XBase

From: Larry Masinter <LM@att.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2000 19:30:14 -0800
To: <www-xml-linking-comments@w3.org>
Cc: "Makoto MURATA" <murata.makoto@fujixerox.co.jp>, "Roy Fielding" <fielding@ics.uci.edu>
The date of RFC 2396 is 1998, not 1995.

I think it is harmful to reference all of ([IETF RFC 2396], [IETF RFC 1738]
[IETF RFC 1808]); RFC 2396 was meant to replace and obsolete RFC 1738 and
1808, and actually wound up redefining some terms.  I think that if you want
to point to history you can do so in the introduction, but that normative
references to URIs should reference 2396 only:

resource: "Note that this term and its definition are taken from the basic
  specifications governing the World Wide Web, such as IETF RFCs [IETF RFC
  [IETF RFC 1738] and [IETF RFC 1808]."

but only one definition should be taken...

"URI-reference // An optional URI ([IETF RFC 2396], [IETF RFC 1738] and
[IETF RFC 1808]) as interpreted "

but this term was defined in 2396 only.

About the linking document:

Note that the revision of the XML mime type definitions should reference
the "xml base" document, since the XML base document (re)defines the
mechanism for determining a BASE URL for its particular media type.
So it updates RFC 2376.

Received on Tuesday, 22 February 2000 22:30:26 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:32:21 UTC