Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-iri-3987bis-11.txt

Hello Julian,

On 2012/03/12 16:20, Julian Reschke wrote:

> References check...:

Is that your private tool, or something available online?


>> Normative References:
>> ASCII: not checked
>> ISO10646: not checked
>> RFC2119: [BEST CURRENT PRACTICE] (-> BCP0014) ok
>> RFC3491: [PROPOSED STANDARD] obsoleted by RFC5891

This is cited in a context where RFC5891 woudldn't be appropriate.

>> RFC3629: [STANDARD] (-> STD0063) ok
>> RFC3986: [STANDARD] (-> STD0066) ok
>> RFC5890: [PROPOSED STANDARD] ok
>> RFC5891: [PROPOSED STANDARD] ok
>> RFC5892: [PROPOSED STANDARD] ok
>> RFC5234: [STANDARD] (-> STD0068) ok
>> UNIV6: not checked
>> UTR15: not checked
>>
>> Informative References:
>> draft-ietf-iri-bidi-guidelines-02: [2012-03-09 ID-Exists] ok
>> Candidate Recommendation: document unknown

We seem to be using both "Recommendation/Note/..." and more explicit 
labels (e.g. REC-xmlschema-2-20041028) in the value attribute for
<seriesInfo name="World Wide Web Consortium". Which one is right?

>> Duerst97: not checked

That's currently in limbo, I have to make sure it's accessible again. I 
have opened http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/iri/trac/ticket/120 for this.

>> draft-ietf-iri-comparison-01: [2012-03-02 IESG] ok
>> Gettys: not checked
>> Recommendation: document unknown
>> RFC2130: [INFORMATIONAL] ok
>> RFC2141: [PROPOSED STANDARD] ok
>> RFC2192: [PROPOSED STANDARD] obsoleted by RFC5092
>> RFC2277: [BEST CURRENT PRACTICE] (-> BCP0018) ok
>> RFC2384: [PROPOSED STANDARD] ok
>> RFC2396: [DRAFT STANDARD] obsoleted by RFC3986
>> RFC2397: [PROPOSED STANDARD] ok
>> RFC2616: [DRAFT STANDARD] ok
>> RFC2640: [PROPOSED STANDARD] ok
>> RFC3987: [PROPOSED STANDARD] ok
>> draft-ietf-iri-4395bis-irireg-03: Alternate version available: 04

Fixed in subversion with revision 108 
(http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/iri/trac/browser/draft-ietf-iri-3987bis?rev=108)

>> RFC5122: [PROPOSED STANDARD] ok
>> RFC6055: [INFORMATIONAL] ok
>> RFC6068: [PROPOSED STANDARD] ok
>> UNIXML: not checked
>> UTR36: not checked
>> REC-xlink-20010627: [REC] ok
>> REC-xml-20081116: document unknown
>> REC-xmlschema-2-20041028: [REC] ok
>> REC-xptr-framework-20030325: [REC] ok
>
> Note the warning for XML; the proper id is REC-xml-20081126.

Fixed in subversion with revision 108 (see above). Actually, that string 
was correct before revision 102, but it was listed as the Forth Edition 
with a date in 2006. When I fixed that, thought I had to fix the id, 
too, and made a typo.

Regards,    Martin.

Received on Tuesday, 13 March 2012 07:54:02 UTC