Re: Some editorial comments about RFC 5234

• From: Frank Ellermann <nobody@xyzzy.claranet.de>
• Date: Sun, 24 Feb 2008 20:01:51 +0100
• To: uri@w3.org
• Message-ID: <fpses3$ode$1@ger.gmane.org>

Nicolas Krebs wrote:

> urn:ietf:rfc:5234 http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5234

Yes, STD 68 got its numbers about three weeks ago.  
Because the text-fragment-09 and mailto-bis-04 I-Ds
are older they still reference RFC 4234.  

My copy of news-nntp-uri-09 references RFC 5234, 
if your copy references 4234 it's unauthorized ;-)

> In urn:ietf:id:draft-duerst-mailto-bis-04 please
> replace each "[RFCXXXX]" by "[I-D.ietf-eai-mailto]", 
> each "[RFCYYYY]" by "[I-D.ietf-eai-utf8headers]"

Wait, you found that in draft-ietf-eai-mailto-00,
this is NOT the same as I-D.duerst-mailto-bis-04.

The EAI mailto-00 draft was posted close to the
cutoff, various nits are already reported on the
EAI list.   The new eai-mailto draft references
mailto-bis, that is as it should be.

 Frank

Received on Sunday, 24 February 2008 19:00:42 UTC