Re: [Bug 20] lock token example

bugzilla@soe.ucsc.edu wrote:
> http://ietf.cse.ucsc.edu:8080/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20
> 
> lisa@osafoundation.org changed:
> 
>            What    |Removed                     |Added
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>              Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED
> 
> 
> 
> ------- Additional Comments From lisa@osafoundation.org  2005-10-15 16:34 -------
> I think I've got all the strays now, in the text for -08.
 > ...

This doesn't look like an improvement -- the spec now uses syntactically 
invalid tokens in the "opaquelocktoken" scheme.

Could you please make sure that the spec always uses registered URI 
schemes, and when doing so, uses URIs that are actually syntactically legal?


Best regards, Julian

Received on Sunday, 16 October 2005 15:47:18 UTC