Re: Last Call: 'Calendaring Extensions to WebDAV (CalDAV)' to Proposed Standard (draft-dusseault-caldav)

Julian,

Everything we were originally planning to take care with notes
to the RFC Editor has been dealt with in draft -15... except
this one. Sorry and thanks for pointing this out again.

We will make sure the RFC Editor changes the text to no longer
make reference to Appendix 4 of RFC 2518.

Thanks,
Bernard

Julian Reschke wrote:
> Julian Reschke schrieb:
>> Bernard Desruisseaux schrieb:
>>> Julian Reschke wrote:
>>>>
>>>> With respect to draft 14, I notice that the reference to RFC2518bis 
>>>> has been downgraded to RFC2518 (which I don't object to), but that 
>>>> references *into* RFC2518 now use broken section numbers (as they 
>>>> haven't been updated accordingly).
>>>
>>> Hi Julian,
>>>
>>> I'm sorry but all references into RFC2518 have been updated accordingly
>>> as far I can tell. Am I missing something?
>>
>> 1) In 
>> <http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/draft-dusseault-caldav-14.html#rfc.section.1.2>, 
>> you don't want to refer to Appendix 4 of RFC2518 as the WG consensus 
>> is that this appendix is incorrect, and for that reason it was removed 
>> in RFC2518bis.
>  > ...
> 
> This problem is still present in the new draft 
> (<http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/draft-dusseault-caldav-15.html#rfc.section.1.2>). 
> 
> 
> Best regards, Julian
> 

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf