Re: [Json] Obsoletes RFC 4627
"Martin J. Dürst" <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp> Fri, 27 September 2013 07:20 UTC
Return-Path: <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
X-Original-To: json@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: json@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D53421F9D9C for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 27 Sep 2013 00:20:21 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -103.096
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.096 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.094, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_JP=1.244, HOST_EQ_JP=1.265, J_CHICKENPOX_93=0.6, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ujmr2uhxs3oh for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 27 Sep 2013 00:20:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from scintmta02.scbb.aoyama.ac.jp (scintmta02.scbb.aoyama.ac.jp [133.2.253.34]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 02C0221F9D95 for <json@ietf.org>; Fri, 27 Sep 2013 00:20:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from scmse02.scbb.aoyama.ac.jp ([133.2.253.231]) by scintmta02.scbb.aoyama.ac.jp (secret/secret) with SMTP id r8R7K8qH009048; Fri, 27 Sep 2013 16:20:08 +0900
Received: from (unknown [133.2.206.134]) by scmse02.scbb.aoyama.ac.jp with smtp id 24c4_59d1_3d804844_2745_11e3_b910_001e6722eec2; Fri, 27 Sep 2013 16:20:08 +0900
Received: from [IPv6:::1] (unknown [133.2.210.1]) by itmail2.it.aoyama.ac.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C4F9BFB14; Fri, 27 Sep 2013 16:20:08 +0900 (JST)
Message-ID: <5245319A.5080004@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2013 16:19:54 +0900
From: "\"Martin J. Dürst\"" <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
Organization: Aoyama Gakuin University
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.9) Gecko/20100722 Eudora/3.0.4
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com>
References: <BF7E36B9C495A6468E8EC573603ED9411EF1BB0B@xmb-aln-x11.cisco.com> <B2706F01-E791-40AE-AC54-6DC7C3E2A0E3@mnot.net> <95AA0989-6473-4E83-861B-E84140EC083F@vpnc.org> <5245038F.4060206@it.aoyama.ac.jp> <CAHBU6it0fBdZHSWqjqNk2jkPx-QvzgB-heCC8fh6NLgcXRNmag@mail.gmail.com> <524520B6.2000609@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <524520B6.2000609@cisco.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>, Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>, JSON WG <json@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Json] Obsoletes RFC 4627
X-BeenThere: json@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "JavaScript Object Notation \(JSON\) WG mailing list" <json.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/json>, <mailto:json-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/json>
List-Post: <mailto:json@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:json-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/json>, <mailto:json-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2013 07:20:21 -0000
On 2013/09/27 15:07, Eliot Lear wrote:
>
> On 9/27/13 8:02 AM, Tim Bray wrote:
>> <wearing-editor-hat>where do “obsoletes” assertions go in the
>> draft?</wearing-editor-hat>
>>
>
> In the header of the document. If you're using xml2rfc, in the<rfc>
> element as an attribute<rfc obsoletes="4627"> (but you would add it to
> the existing<rfc>.
Or directly from the DTD:
<!ELEMENT rfc (front,middle,back?)>
<!ATTLIST rfc
number %NUMBER; #IMPLIED
obsoletes %NUMBERS; ""
...
I guess you can still read this, Tim? Not everybody likes DTDs, but
sometimes, they're actually useful :-).
Regards, Martin.
- [Json] Working Group Last Call of draft-ietf-json… Matt Miller (mamille2)
- Re: [Json] Working Group Last Call of draft-ietf-… R S
- [Json] Differences between RFC 4627 or the curren… Paul Hoffman
- Re: [Json] Differences between RFC 4627 or the cu… Tim Bray
- Re: [Json] Differences between RFC 4627 or the cu… Eliot Lear
- [Json] ECMA-262 normative? Carsten Bormann
- Re: [Json] ECMA-262 normative? John Cowan
- Re: [Json] ECMA-262 normative? Paul Hoffman
- Re: [Json] ECMA-262 normative? Tim Bray
- Re: [Json] ECMA-262 normative? Eliot Lear
- Re: [Json] ECMA-262 normative? R S
- Re: [Json] ECMA-262 normative? Tim Bray
- Re: [Json] ECMA-262 normative? Carsten Bormann
- Re: [Json] Differences between RFC 4627 or the cu… R S
- Re: [Json] Differences between RFC 4627 or the cu… Paul Hoffman
- Re: [Json] Differences between RFC 4627 or the cu… R S
- Re: [Json] Differences between RFC 4627 or the cu… Paul Hoffman
- Re: [Json] Differences between RFC 4627 or the cu… R S
- Re: [Json] Differences between RFC 4627 or the cu… Tony Hansen
- Re: [Json] Differences between RFC 4627 or the cu… R S
- Re: [Json] Differences between RFC 4627 or the cu… Carsten Bormann
- Re: [Json] Differences between RFC 4627 or the cu… Tony Hansen
- Re: [Json] Differences between RFC 4627 or the cu… R S
- Re: [Json] Differences between RFC 4627 or the cu… Tony Hansen
- Re: [Json] Differences between RFC 4627 or the cu… John Cowan
- Re: [Json] Differences between RFC 4627 or the cu… Tim Bray
- Re: [Json] Differences between RFC 4627 or the cu… R S
- Re: [Json] Differences between RFC 4627 or the cu… Paul Hoffman
- Re: [Json] Differences between RFC 4627 or the cu… Tony Hansen
- Re: [Json] section 1 paragraph 2 on what JSON can… Tony Hansen
- Re: [Json] section 1 paragraph 2 on what JSON can… Carsten Bormann
- Re: [Json] section 1 paragraph 2 on what JSON can… Tim Bray
- Re: [Json] section 1 paragraph 2 on what JSON can… John Cowan
- Re: [Json] section 1 paragraph 2 on what JSON can… Tony Hansen
- Re: [Json] section 1 paragraph 2 on what JSON can… Paul Hoffman
- Re: [Json] section 1 paragraph 2 on what JSON can… Manger, James H
- Re: [Json] section 1 paragraph 2 on what JSON can… John Cowan
- Re: [Json] section 1 paragraph 2 on what JSON can… Manger, James H
- Re: [Json] Differences between RFC 4627 or the cu… Jorge Chamorro
- Re: [Json] Differences between RFC 4627 or the cu… Tony Hansen
- Re: [Json] Differences between RFC 4627 or the cu… Jorge Chamorro
- Re: [Json] Differences between RFC 4627 or the cu… R S
- Re: [Json] Differences between RFC 4627 or the cu… John Cowan
- Re: [Json] Differences between RFC 4627 or the cu… Tim Bray
- Re: [Json] Differences between RFC 4627 or the cu… Carsten Bormann
- Re: [Json] Differences between RFC 4627 or the cu… Martin J. Dürst
- Re: [Json] Differences between RFC 4627 or the cu… John Cowan
- Re: [Json] Differences between RFC 4627 or the cu… Jorge Chamorro
- Re: [Json] Differences between RFC 4627 or the cu… Tim Bray
- Re: [Json] Differences between RFC 4627 or the cu… R S
- Re: [Json] Differences between RFC 4627 or the cu… Martin J. Dürst
- Re: [Json] Differences between RFC 4627 or the cu… Bjoern Hoehrmann
- Re: [Json] Differences between RFC 4627 or the cu… Tim Bray
- Re: [Json] Differences between RFC 4627 or the cu… Tim Bray
- Re: [Json] Differences between RFC 4627 or the cu… R S
- Re: [Json] Differences between RFC 4627 or the cu… Paul Hoffman
- Re: [Json] Differences between RFC 4627 or the cu… Carsten Bormann
- [Json] "suffer fatal runtime exceptions" Paul Hoffman
- Re: [Json] "suffer fatal runtime exceptions" R S
- Re: [Json] "suffer fatal runtime exceptions" Tim Bray
- [Json] -0.0 Paul Hoffman
- Re: [Json] -0.0 R S
- Re: [Json] -0.0 Tim Bray
- Re: [Json] -0.0 R S
- Re: [Json] -0.0 Tim Bray
- Re: [Json] -0.0 John Cowan
- Re: [Json] -0.0 Martin J. Dürst
- Re: [Json] -0.0 R S
- Re: [Json] -0.0 Martin J. Dürst
- Re: [Json] -0.0 Carsten Bormann
- Re: [Json] -0.0 John Cowan
- Re: [Json] -0.0 Matt Miller (mamille2)
- Re: [Json] -0.0 R S
- Re: [Json] -0.0 R S
- Re: [Json] -0.0 R S
- Re: [Json] -0.0 John Cowan
- Re: [Json] -0.0 R S
- Re: [Json] -0.0 Carsten Bormann
- Re: [Json] -0.0 R S
- Re: [Json] -0.0 Carsten Bormann
- Re: [Json] -0.0 Tim Bray
- Re: [Json] -0.0 Peter Patel-Schneider
- Re: [Json] -0.0 John Cowan
- Re: [Json] -0.0 Paul Hoffman
- Re: [Json] -0.0 John Cowan
- Re: [Json] -0.0 R S
- Re: [Json] -0.0 Carsten Bormann
- Re: [Json] -0.0 John Cowan
- Re: [Json] -0.0 R S
- Re: [Json] -0.0 Bjoern Hoehrmann
- Re: [Json] Working Group Last Call of draft-ietf-… Tim Bray
- Re: [Json] Working Group Last Call of draft-ietf-… Mark Nottingham
- Re: [Json] Working Group Last Call of draft-ietf-… Peter Saint-Andre
- Re: [Json] Working Group Last Call of draft-ietf-… Tim Bray
- Re: [Json] [authorship] (was: Working Group Last … Martin J. Dürst
- [Json] Authorship Paul Hoffman
- Re: [Json] Authorship R S
- Re: [Json] Authorship Peter Saint-Andre
- Re: [Json] Authorship John Cowan
- Re: [Json] Authorship Eliot Lear
- Re: [Json] Authorship Pete Resnick
- Re: [Json] Authorship Bjoern Hoehrmann
- [Json] Change Control (was: Re: Authorship) Martin J. Dürst
- [Json] Indentation (was: Re: Change Control) Martin J. Dürst
- Re: [Json] Indentation (was: Re: Change Control) Carsten Bormann
- Re: [Json] Indentation (was: Re: Change Control) Carsten Bormann
- Re: [Json] Change Control (was: Re: Authorship) Jorge Chamorro
- [Json] Change control for the MIME media type Paul Hoffman
- [Json] Obsoletes RFC 4627 Paul Hoffman
- Re: [Json] Obsoletes RFC 4627 Martin J. Dürst
- Re: [Json] Obsoletes RFC 4627 Tim Bray
- Re: [Json] Obsoletes RFC 4627 Eliot Lear
- Re: [Json] Obsoletes RFC 4627 Martin J. Dürst
- [Json] Section 1.3, "Changes from RFC 4627" Paul Hoffman
- Re: [Json] Section 1.3, "Changes from RFC 4627" Martin J. Dürst