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

[Bernard Desruisseaux <bernard.desruisseaux at oracle.com>]

Julian,

Everything we were originally planning to take care with notes
to the RFC Editor has been dealt with in draft -15... except
this one. Sorry and thanks for pointing this out again.

We will make sure the RFC Editor changes the text to no longer
make reference to Appendix 4 of RFC 2518.

Thanks,
Bernard

Julian Reschke wrote:
> 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