RE: Fwd: Last Call: XML Media Types to Proposed Standard

muraw3c@attglobal.net Wed, 13 September 2000 16:13 UTC

Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id JAA12858 for ietf-xml-mime-bks; Wed, 13 Sep 2000 09:13:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from prserv.net (out5.prserv.net [32.97.166.35]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA12854 for <ietf-xml-mime@imc.org>; Wed, 13 Sep 2000 09:13:11 -0700 (PDT)
From: muraw3c@attglobal.net
Received: from localhost ([210.88.161.117]) by prserv.net (out5) with SMTP id <2000091316152120500bjaeqe>; Wed, 13 Sep 2000 16:15:22 +0000
To: ietf-xml-mime@imc.org, iesg@ietf.org
Subject: RE: Fwd: Last Call: XML Media Types to Proposed Standard
In-Reply-To: <01JTVWKHO4SK000BHR@mauve.mrochek.com>
References: <NDBBKEBDLFENBJCGFOIJAEEFDGAA.masinter@attlabs.att.com> <20000907233037M.muraw3c@attglobal.net> <01JTVWKHO4SK000BHR@mauve.mrochek.com>
X-Mailer: Mew version 1.94.2 on Emacs 20.4 / Mule 4.1 (AOI)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <20000914011515L.muraw3c@attglobal.net>
Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 01:15:15 +0900
X-Dispatcher: imput version 20000228(IM140)
Lines: 27
Sender: owner-ietf-xml-mime@mail.imc.org
Precedence: bulk
List-Archive: <http://www.imc.org/ietf-xml-mime/mail-archive/>
List-ID: <ietf-xml-mime.imc.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-xml-mime-request@imc.org?body=unsubscribe>

From: ned.freed@INNOSOFT.COM
Subject: RE: Fwd: Last Call: XML Media Types to Proposed Standard
Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2000 08:56:12 -0700 (PDT)

> Sounds fine to me. Please submit an updated version of the draft.
> Unfortunately, given that this is a change to requirements language I think
> we'll have to restart the last call, so the sooner the better on this.

After the minor modification, a new I-D has been published. 
Its URL is:

http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-murata-xml-08.txt

The second edition of XML 1.0 is being prepared and is expected to be
published in the very near future.  At present, it references to RFC
2376.  If the last call has to be really restarted, the second edition
will probably have to continue to reference to RFC 2376.

Cheers,

IBM Tokyo Research Lab &
International University of Japan, Research Institute

MURATA Makoto