ietf-822
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: transport-related issues in RFC-XXXX

1991-10-25 10:53:29
Excerpts from internet.ietf-822: 25-Oct-91 Re: transport-related issue..
John Noerenberg(_at_)qualcomm (1193)

In the main I think a version stamp is a *good* idea. 
But since RFC-XXXX offers both subset compliance and full compliance, a UA
should be able to distinguish compliance with the RFC from this field. 
Nathaniel, how about adding a RFC-XXXXs (for subset) token for this
purpose?

I'm not sure this helps.  It doesn't define *what* subset.  To do that,
of course, would require a MUCH more complex syntax, which I don't
advocate.  I think that saying "RFC-XXXX" means "satisfies the
guidelines in the minimal conformance appendix" should suffice.   I'm
not entirely sure what a "full" implementation would be anyway -- all
character sets?  All image types?  Must support mpeg video?  I doubt
there will be any implementations THAT full for some time, if ever... --
Nathaniel

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>