Re: [Json] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7158 (3907)
"Martin J. Dürst" <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp> Tue, 04 March 2014 09:01 UTC
Return-Path: <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
X-Original-To: json@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: json@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E45C1A0426 for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 4 Mar 2014 01:01:26 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.938
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.938 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_EQ_JP=1.244, HOST_EQ_JP=1.265, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.547] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id XHVH9Bz0Hp6A for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 4 Mar 2014 01:01:18 -0800 (PST)
Received: from scintmta02.scbb.aoyama.ac.jp (scintmta02.scbb.aoyama.ac.jp [133.2.253.34]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7478A1A0418 for <json@ietf.org>; Tue, 4 Mar 2014 01:01:18 -0800 (PST)
Received: from scmse02.scbb.aoyama.ac.jp ([133.2.253.231]) by scintmta02.scbb.aoyama.ac.jp (secret/secret) with SMTP id s2491DFk025108 for <json@ietf.org>; Tue, 4 Mar 2014 18:01:13 +0900
Received: from (unknown [133.2.206.134]) by scmse02.scbb.aoyama.ac.jp with smtp id 1108_2b95_899c2204_a37b_11e3_ba19_001e6722eec2; Tue, 04 Mar 2014 18:01:12 +0900
Received: from [IPv6:::1] (unknown [133.2.210.1]) by itmail2.it.aoyama.ac.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id D3693BF4D0 for <json@ietf.org>; Tue, 4 Mar 2014 18:01:12 +0900 (JST)
Message-ID: <53159651.10601@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
Date: Tue, 04 Mar 2014 18:01:05 +0900
From: "\"Martin J. Dürst\"" <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
Organization: Aoyama Gakuin University
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: json@ietf.org
References: <20140302203413.A7DEB7FC2CB@rfc-editor.org> <v687h9pv3q3tpodgrq01c9ogt1oe9cilbs@hive.bjoern.hoehrmann.de> <20140302220629.GA4246@schmorp.de> <82b7h9l5djqeali7cr36uadlicg1183bsv@hive.bjoern.hoehrmann.de> <D18494CF-5CBC-4DDC-A1B6-01CB8B78AE8E@nic.cz> <53146287.1030505@qti.qualcomm.com>
In-Reply-To: <53146287.1030505@qti.qualcomm.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/json/zXBi1rWC3ULuu7zN7uXfrA1jqiQ
Subject: Re: [Json] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7158 (3907)
X-BeenThere: json@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: Tue, 04 Mar 2014 09:01:26 -0000
I saw the announcement for the new RFC (7159). For the record, although I understand the basic idea behind the policy that RFCs are never changed, I think it would have been much wiser to just make the change in place. In the long run (in this case, my guess would be that this means more than one week), the implications would have been much smaller than having to live with two virtually identical RFCs with numbers differing only by 1 for a long time. Regards, Martin. P.S.: Needless to say that the best would have to be to avoid the mistake in the first place. P.P.S.: W3C has a policy for very limited in-place fixes (http://www.w3.org/2003/01/republishing/), but it doesn't include this case. On 2014/03/03 20:07, Pete Resnick wrote: > On 3/3/14 11:03 AM, Ladislav Lhotka wrote: >> Hmm, according to the RFC 7158 text, the month of publication appears >> to be “March 2013”. > > Yes, we noticed that. The RFC Editor is going to publish a corrected > version. > > pr >
- [Json] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7158 (3907) RFC Errata System
- Re: [Json] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7158 (3… Bjoern Hoehrmann
- Re: [Json] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7158 (3… Bjoern Hoehrmann
- Re: [Json] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7158 (3… Pete Resnick
- Re: [Json] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7158 (3… Martin J. Dürst
- Re: [Json] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7158 (3… Paul Hoffman
- Re: [Json] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7158 (3… Bjoern Hoehrmann
- Re: [Json] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7158 (3… Paul E. Jones
- [Json] On the errata (Was: [Technical Errata Repo… Pete Resnick
- Re: [Json] On the errata (Was: [Technical Errata … Paul Hoffman
- Re: [Json] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7158 (3… Tim Bray
- Re: [Json] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7158 (3… Paul E. Jones
- Re: [Json] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7158 (3… Joe Hildebrand (jhildebr)
- Re: [Json] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7158 (3… Paul E. Jones
- Re: [Json] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7158 (3… R S