- From: Roy T. Fielding <fielding@gbiv.com>
- Date: Mon, 9 Aug 2004 14:08:48 -0700
- To: "McDonald, Ira" <imcdonald@sharplabs.com>
- Cc: "'Larry Masinter'" <LMM@acm.org>, uri@w3.org
On Monday, August 9, 2004, at 12:17 PM, McDonald, Ira wrote: > 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. That does not follow at all. Obviously, you have to read RFC 2396 as it was just to get the section references right, aside from the BNF rules, neither of which are obsoleted by later documents. Only their status as the standard is obsoleted. Telling people that they should follow the standard when implementing URIs does not imply that the grammar in older documents ceases to exist -- it is still archived under the RFC 2396 name. > 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?) No. Standards do not change often. ....Roy
Received on Monday, 9 August 2004 21:09:01 UTC