On 03/05/2017 08:57, Julian Reschke wrote:
On 2017-05-02 21:18, Carsten Bormann wrote:
Review of draft-nottingham-rfc5988bis-05.txt
Reviewer: Carsten Bormann
Review result: Ready with a few issues
(This is not a complete review, but in its present state might serve
to initiate discussion of items relevant to RFC 6690 and thus
draft-ietf-core-links-json.)
This specification updates RFC 5988. The objectives for this update
are not clearly stated, but it seems to be based on experience with
RFC 5988 as well as based on advances possible with the publication of
RFC 7230.
# Major technical
T1: The draft does not take position what should happen when
serializations allowed by RFC 5988 but not by the present spec occur,
e.g.: ;type=text/plain (would now need to be ;type="text/plain").
...
FWIW, it's allowed in RFC 5988, but there's a five year old erratum
about it (<https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?eid=3158>).
Unfortunately, the status is "held for document update", not "approved".
The change was not purely in the "oh, this is what we meant" category,
so I think "held for document update" is fine. The change was
incorporated in draft-nottingham-rfc5988bis-05.txt.
(And yes, there's the orthogonal topic that people are not aware of
errata, see my experiment to improve that:
<https://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/rfc5988.html#header.link>).
Best regards, Julian