Hi David,
At 23:03 15-12-2013, David Farmer wrote:
This is probably only a meta-data issue handled by the RFC-Editor,
but as this obsoletes RFC 3184, which is also BCP 57, this document
becomes BCP 57, which I believe is the intended result. I mostly
just want to confirm this, I'm not sure it needs to be mentioned in
the text itself.
The document will become BCP 54 if it is published. The BCP part is
about meta-data. It is handled by the RFC Editor and it does not
have to mentioned in the document.
Thank you, I think that makes it read a little cleaner. I also like
how this puts a little more emphasis on the fact that "we AIM to
abide by these guidelines", subtly acknowledging the imperfections of us all.
Yes. Mistakes can happen.
Regards,
S. Moonesamy