Re: Last Call: <draft-nottingham-rfc5988bis-05.txt> (Web Linking) to Proposed Standard

[Julian Reschke <[e-mail]>]

On 2017-05-02 21:18, Carsten Bormann wrote:
> Review of draft-nottingham-rfc5988bis-05.txt
> Reviewer: Carsten Bormann
> Review result: Ready with a few issues
>
> (This is not a complete review, but in its present state might serve
> to initiate discussion of items relevant to RFC 6690 and thus
> draft-ietf-core-links-json.)
>
> This specification updates RFC 5988.  The objectives for this update
> are not clearly stated, but it seems to be based on experience with
> RFC 5988 as well as based on advances possible with the publication of
> RFC 7230.
>
> # Major technical
>
> T1: The draft does not take position what should happen when
> serializations allowed by RFC 5988 but not by the present spec occur,
> e.g.: ;type=text/plain (would now need to be ;type="text/plain").
> ...

FWIW, it's allowed in RFC 5988, but there's a five year old erratum 
about it (<https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?eid=3158>). 
Unfortunately, the status is "held for document update", not "approved".

(And yes, there's the orthogonal topic that people are not aware of 
errata, see my experiment to improve that: 
<https://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/rfc5988.html#header.link>).

Best regards, Julian