Re: [apps-discuss] WGLC for draft-ietf-appsawg-mime-default-charset

[Julian Reschke <[e-mail]>]

On 2012-04-13 20:52, Alexey Melnikov wrote:
> On 10/04/2012 14:38, Julian Reschke wrote:
>> On 2012-04-10 15:18, Alexey Melnikov wrote:
>>> ...
>>>> Not sure I see any need for a normative reference though.
>>>
>>> (I've mentioned my opinion to Julian, but I would like to state it for
>>> the record.)
>>> I think an update to RFC 2616 should have a reference to
>>> draft-ietf-appsawg-mime-default-charset and make it clear that the
>>> previous default was removed. An Informative reference to
>>> draft-ietf-appsawg-mime-default-charset should be fine.
>>
>> HTTPbis *does* make it clear that the default (overriding the base
>> spec) was removed.
>>
>> What's not clear to me is why it would need to reference
>> draft-ietf-appsawg-mime-default-charset.
> People who only read/implemented RFC 2616 need to be told that the rules
> changed. Similarly for people who read/implemented RFC 2046. Navigating
> through the maze of RFCs obsoleting each other is difficult for people
> who don't deal with them on a daily basis (and it is non trivial even
> for people who do). A reference to
> draft-ietf-appsawg-mime-default-charset would help with that.

I'm still not convinced.

HTTPbis removes the default, and states so in the "Changes from RFC 
2616" section. How does a reference to 
draft-ietf-appsawg-mime-default-charset make things better?

Best regards, Julian