RFC 4395 should replace BCP 35, not separate BCP from Larry Masinter on 2009-01-17 (www-tag@w3.org from January 2009)

From: Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com>
Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 08:17:02 -0800
To: Lisa Dusseault <ldusseault@commerce.net>, "iana@iana.org" <iana@iana.org>, "rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org" <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
CC: "uri@w3.org" <uri@w3.org>, "www-tag@w3.org" <www-tag@w3.org>, "Ted Hardie (hardie@qualcomm.com)" <hardie@qualcomm.com>, "Tony Hansen (tony@att.com)" <tony@att.com>
Message-ID: <8B62A039C620904E92F1233570534C9B0118C83C9D06@nambx04.corp.adobe.com>

RFC 4395   http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4395  explicitly obsoletes RFC 2717 and RFC 2718.

RFC 2717 is also listed as BCP 35.

The intention was for RFC 4395 to become the updated BCP 35.

Instead,  RFC 4395 was instead registered as BCP 115, and BCP 35 left intact.

This wasn't the intent, and the references as they stand make no sense.

I'm not sure what the best way of correcting this situation is, but I would suggest (a) updating BCP 35 to point to RFC 4395, and (b) replacing BCP 115 with a note that it was assigned in error and to see BCP 35.

I suppose  a very short internet draft which explained this error and made this proposal could be approved as a protocol action and used as BCP 115.

Larry

Received on Saturday, 17 January 2009 16:18:07 UTC