- From: Graham Klyne <GK@ninebynine.org>
- Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2004 11:46:05 +0100
- To: Mike Brown <mike@skew.org>
- Cc: uri@w3.org
At 18:10 09/09/04 -0700, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
>On Sep 9, 2004, at 5:35 PM, Mike Brown wrote:
>>Roy T. Fielding wrote:
>>>it is moving RFC 2396 to Obsolete status.
>>
>>Thanks, but where is Obsolete status formally defined?
>>It is not mentioned in RFC 2026 or its errata.
>
>I have no idea -- I don't think 2026 accurately describes how the
>RFC editor function works anyway, which is why there are other
>working groups working on that. I do know that the term Historic
>is only placed in the Status section when a protocol is put out
>to pasture (i.e., no further specification will take place).
A little digging...
http://www.rfc-editor.org/
->
http://www.rfc-editor.org/overview.html
-- See: References, "Instructions to RFC Authors" (formerly RFC 2223).
->
ftp://ftp.rfc-editor.org/in-notes/rfc-editor/instructions2authors.txt
-- see section 2.11
->
[[
Obsoletes
Specifies an earlier document that is replaced by the new
document. The new document can be used alone as a
replacement for the obsoleted document. The new document
may contain revised information or all of the same
information plus some new information, however extensive or
brief that new information may be.
]]
#g
------------
Graham Klyne
For email:
http://www.ninebynine.org/#Contact
Received on Friday, 10 September 2004 11:00:49 UTC