RE: semantics of host field in http URI

Hi,

Even more judgment is required.

The RFC Index gives normative status of documents.
RFC 2396 will be 'obsoleted by RFC 2396bis'.  Which
means you're _not_ supposed to read RFC 2396, when
you find that cross-reference in RFC 2616.

Thus my concern with the disappearance of named
ABNF rules in successive versions.  (I presume
that Roy's recent comment that RFC 2396bis is
expected to remain stable for 30 years was humor?)

Cheers,
- Ira

Ira McDonald (Musician / Software Architect)
Blue Roof Music / High North Inc
PO Box 221  Grand Marais, MI  49839
phone: +1-906-494-2434
email: imcdonald@sharplabs.com

-----Original Message-----
From: uri-request@w3.org [mailto:uri-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Larry
Masinter
Sent: Monday, August 09, 2004 1:22 PM
To: uri@w3.org
Subject: RE: semantics of host field in http URI



Alas, some judgment is required.

RFC 2616 refers to RFC 2396, and will continue to do so
even when RFC 2396 is obsoleted by rfc2396bis.  When RFC 2616
gets updated, the update will be more complicated than
mechanically changing the references to point to the
(by then approved) RFC for rfc2396bis.

Larry
-- 
http://larry.masinter.net

Received on Monday, 9 August 2004 19:17:50 UTC