Re: Last Call: 'Calendaring Extensions to WebDAV (CalDAV)' to Proposed Standard (draft-dusseault-caldav)

[Julian Reschke <julian.reschke at gmx.de>]

Julian Reschke schrieb:
> Bernard Desruisseaux schrieb:
> > Julian Reschke wrote:
> > > With respect to draft 14, I notice that the reference to RFC2518bis 
> > > has been downgraded to RFC2518 (which I don't object to), but that 
> > > references *into* RFC2518 now use broken section numbers (as they 
> > > haven't been updated accordingly).
> >
> > Hi Julian,
> >
> > I'm sorry but all references into RFC2518 have been updated accordingly
> > as far I can tell. Am I missing something?
>
> 1) In 
> <http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/draft-dusseault-caldav-14.html#rfc.section.1.2>, 
> you don't want to refer to Appendix 4 of RFC2518 as the WG consensus is 
> that this appendix is incorrect, and for that reason it was removed in 
> RFC2518bis.
> ...

This problem is still present in the new draft 
(<http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/draft-dusseault-caldav-15.html#rfc.section.1.2>).

Best regards, Julian


_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf