IETF Logo Mail Archive

[Uri-review] Re: rfc4622bis: review requested

Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> Thu, 07 June 2007 19:14 UTC

Return-path: <uri-review-bounces@ietf.org>
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HwNR4-0008Rw-Ub; Thu, 07 Jun 2007 15:14:18 -0400
Received: from uri-review by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1HwNR3-0008Rr-72 for uri-review-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 07 Jun 2007 15:14:17 -0400
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HwNR2-0008Rj-Tq for uri-review@ietf.org; Thu, 07 Jun 2007 15:14:16 -0400
Received: from mail.gmx.net ([213.165.64.20]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HwNR1-0003K7-Fm for uri-review@ietf.org; Thu, 07 Jun 2007 15:14:16 -0400
Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 07 Jun 2007 19:14:14 -0000
Received: from p508f9544.dip0.t-ipconnect.de (EHLO [192.168.178.22]) [80.143.149.68] by mail.gmx.net (mp007) with SMTP; 07 Jun 2007 21:14:14 +0200
X-Authenticated: #1915285
X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX18ZCBBjHYEZiDOaCInrHaPZ46iTFCwOv0VuX64f7Y n/T01rxeo73Sn4
Message-ID: <46685903.5000706@gmx.de>
Date: Thu, 07 Jun 2007 21:14:11 +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: Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@jabber.org>
References: <20070607182031.GF31365@jabber.org> <46684F31.8000802@gmx.de> <20070607190223.GI31365@jabber.org>
In-Reply-To: <20070607190223.GI31365@jabber.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: ffa9dfbbe7cc58b3fa6b8ae3e57b0aa3
Cc: uri@w3.org, uri-review@ietf.org
Subject: [Uri-review] Re: rfc4622bis: review requested
X-BeenThere: uri-review@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Proposed URI Schemes <uri-review.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/uri-review>, <mailto:uri-review-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:uri-review@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:uri-review-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/uri-review>, <mailto:uri-review-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: uri-review-bounces@ietf.org

Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> ...
>> (2) Independently of that, a diff to RFC4622 would be useful, such as in 
>> <http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/rfcdiff.pyht?url1=http://tools.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4622.txt&url2=http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-saintandre-rfc4622bis-00.txt>.
> 
> Do I-Ds generally contain such references? I have not seen them (perhaps
> because they could be rather evanescent).

Nope. But it's useful to get people reviewing stuff. Mentioning the link 
over here is sufficient.

>> (3) 
>> <http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-saintandre-rfc4622bis-00#section-3.8> 
>> says: "See Section 5 of RFC 4622, Security Considerations." There may be 
>> other instances like that.
> 
> My working copy has things like "See Section 5 of &rfc.number;" (where
> the &rfc.number; reference is to be replaced by the RFC Editor).

Ah, xml2rfc black magic, to be avoided. It's not XML.

As it's a some-document reference, why mention the document name at all?

>  ...

Best regards, Julian


_______________________________________________
Uri-review mailing list
Uri-review@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/uri-review

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email