Re: Strange "downref" to RFC2068 in description of 304 (new Issue 126)
Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> Thu, 07 August 2008 14:34 UTC
Return-Path: <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A199428C1A3 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 7 Aug 2008 07:34:50 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -8.65
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.65 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.949, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vtXb4FdXgXot for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 7 Aug 2008 07:34:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from frink.w3.org (frink.w3.org [128.30.52.56]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC41928C1AD for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Thu, 7 Aug 2008 07:34:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1KR6ZX-0004jF-A2 for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 07 Aug 2008 14:34:35 +0000
Received: from maggie.w3.org ([193.51.208.68]) by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from <julian.reschke@gmx.de>) id 1KR6ZS-0004h8-9M for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Thu, 07 Aug 2008 14:34:30 +0000
Received: from mail.gmx.net ([213.165.64.20]) by maggie.w3.org with smtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from <julian.reschke@gmx.de>) id 1KR6ZI-0006pn-Qr for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Thu, 07 Aug 2008 14:34:29 +0000
Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 07 Aug 2008 14:33:49 -0000
Received: from mail.greenbytes.de (EHLO [192.168.1.106]) [217.91.35.233] by mail.gmx.net (mp006) with SMTP; 07 Aug 2008 16:33:49 +0200
X-Authenticated: #1915285
X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX190dQ8/0Dd0JaFGGC3606t3SfA6VSg0YcYOhBPxGb 1uzyPX97X3olrp
Message-ID: <489B07C8.4050800@gmx.de>
Date: Thu, 07 Aug 2008 16:33:44 +0200
From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; de; rv:1.8.0.4) Gecko/20060516 Thunderbird/1.5.0.4 Mnenhy/0.7.4.666
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Henrik Nordstrom <henrik@henriknordstrom.net>
CC: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
References: <4898B614.3030707@gmx.de> <4898B740.9000400@gmx.de> <1218119650.28467.71.camel@hlaptop.henriknordstrom.net>
In-Reply-To: <1218119650.28467.71.camel@hlaptop.henriknordstrom.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0
X-FuHaFi: 0.6
Received-SPF: pass
X-SPF-Guess: pass
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: BAYES_00=-2.599, SPF_PASS=-0.001
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: maggie.w3.org 1KR6ZI-0006pn-Qr 4f99077bb74e928f66482c542e34086c
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: Strange "downref" to RFC2068 in description of 304 (new Issue 126)
Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/489B07C8.4050800@gmx.de>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/5107
X-Loop: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Sender: ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org
Resent-Sender: ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org
Precedence: list
List-Id: <ietf-http-wg.w3.org>
List-Help: <http://www.w3.org/Mail/>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org?subject=unsubscribe>
Resent-Message-Id: <E1KR6ZX-0004jF-A2@frink.w3.org>
Resent-Date: Thu, 07 Aug 2008 14:34:35 +0000
Henrik Nordstrom wrote: > tis 2008-08-05 klockan 22:25 +0200 skrev Julian Reschke: >> Julian Reschke wrote: >>> ... >>> (Historical note: that statement apparently was added in >>> draft-ietf-http-v11-spec-08) >>> ... >> Seems that this issue is related to proposed text in >> <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/ietf-http-wg-old/1997JanApr/0884.html>, >> which was added too verbatim to the RFC2068bis==RFC2616. > > Seems so indeed. > > And as it's clear what really should be referenced (internal reference > to Date) i'd say it's an editorial issue. Yes, I went ahead and fixed it in <http://www3.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/changeset/306>. BR, Julian
- Strange "downref" to RFC2068 in description of 30… Julian Reschke
- Re: Strange "downref" to RFC2068 in description o… Julian Reschke
- Re: Strange "downref" to RFC2068 in description o… Julian Reschke
- Re: Strange "downref" to RFC2068 in description o… Henrik Nordstrom