[Uri-review] Re: rfc4622bis: review requested

On Thu, Jun 07, 2007 at 08:32:17PM +0200, Julian Reschke wrote:
> Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> >As previously pointed out, there are some errors in RFC 4622. I have
> >attempted to correct them here:
> >
> >http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-saintandre-rfc4622bis-00.txt
> >
> >No one has told me there are errors in rfc4622bis, but since Roy
> >Fielding said RFC 4622 is broken and should be removed from the
> >standards track [1] I want to make sure that my attempted corrections 
> >are indeed correct.
> >
> >Unless I receive feedback that rfc4622bis does not fix the problems with
> >RFC 4622, I will assume that it does, complete another pass through the
> >document to ensure that it is as correct as I can make it, then request
> >a standards action from the appropriate AD.
> >
> >Thanks!
> 
> (1) I think you should have a section stating what the changes are.

Added to my working copy.

> (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).

> (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).

> (4) Front matter should say: "Obsoletes: 4622".

Ah, just discovered how to do that in xml2rfc, thanks.

Peter

-- 
Peter Saint-Andre
XMPP Standards Foundation
http://www.xmpp.org/xsf/people/stpeter.shtml

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