[Top] [All Lists]

Re: More on mail message header fields

2004-05-12 09:18:46

 Graham Klyne <GK-lists(_at_)ninebynine(_dot_)org> writes:

I'll defer to any IETF process experts, but it seems fairly clear to me 
that a standard stands until it is replaced.  A Proposed or Draft standard 
that updates a standard is a pretty clear statement of intent (and as such 
is useful guidance to implementers), but does not replace an existing 
standard until it becomes one itself.

It is generally more useful to refer to the new Proposed/Draft version.
For example, I see that in draft-klyne-hdrreg-mail-04.txt you routinely
refer to RFC 2822 rather than to RFC 822, and rightly so in my opinion,
so I hope you aren't going to change it. So are you suggesting that _both_
should be referred to in the registry?

In this case, I think what matters is what the community agrees should go 
into the registry.

I think the community has accepted that RFC 2822 has superseded RFC 822
for all practical purposes. If any niggles remain, they will be resolved
by some update to RFC 2822 (as Pete has proposed) rather than by going
back to RFC 822.

Charles H. Lindsey ---------At Home, doing my own thing------------------------
Tel: +44 161 436 6131 Fax: +44 161 436 6133   Web:
Email: chl(_at_)clerew(_dot_)man(_dot_)ac(_dot_)uk      Snail: 5 Clerewood Ave, 
PGP: 2C15F1A9      Fingerprint: 73 6D C2 51 93 A0 01 E7 65 E8 64 7E 14 A4 AB A5