- From: Roy T. Fielding <fielding@apache.org>
- Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2003 21:38:03 -0700
- To: "Dan Kohn" <dan@dankohn.com>
- Cc: <uri@w3.org>
> Roy, latest draft looks great, except for the following issues (all > minor): Thanks. > Under no reasonable definition of the phrase "in common use" could the > gopher URI fit. It should be removed. It is pretty common in historical documents. ;-) Seriously, though, gopher is still in common use in Universities. I'd prefer to find a replacement example, such as imap or urn -- suggestions are welcome. > In Appendix D, please consider putting the names of rules in > <brackets>, > as recommended in RFC 2234, Section 2.1. I actually tried that while working on 03 and the result was butt-ugly and much harder to read. Unless there is a strong objection, I'd prefer to keep it clean. > There's not enough information to dereference [Siedzik]. The symbolic > name [UTF-8} should be changed to [RFC2279] for consistency. Also, > please change <?rfc sortrefs="no"?> to yes to make it easier to review > the references. Hmm, I guess we should be consistent. Personally, I prefer symbolic names like UTF-8 except when we are referring to a specific RFC number. http://www.giac.org/practical/gsec/Richard_Siedzik_GSEC.pdf Unfortunately, the xml2rfc doesn't know much about non-RFC references. ....Roy
Received on Tuesday, 10 June 2003 00:42:52 UTC