RE: [ietf-provreg] Small bibliography error in RFC 4930

["Hollenbeck, Scott" <shollenbeck@verisign.com>]

After a private exchange with Randy Presuhn of the LTRU working group I
realized it might be helpful if I provide more info to explain why 4930
references 3066 instead of 4646.  First, let me confirm that this wasn't
an oversight.  It was a conscious decision made with the concurrence of
the IESG as we looked at the normative references and the standards
track status of those references.  Rationale:

1. 4930 is the draft standard version of 3730, updated to document
implementation experience with 3730.  3730 references 3066.  The first
drafts of what would become 4930 referenced 3066 before 4646 was
approved and published.  Implementers of 3730 and 4930 wrote code per
3066.

2. 3730 and 4930 include a language tag reference because language tags
are used within XML Schema elements.  The October 2004 edition of the
normative XML Schema datatypes reference cites 3066:

http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2/#language

Consistency was thus thought to be a good thing.  If this were new work
I'd agree that 4646 would be the more appropriate reference, but that
would also depend on the XML specifications picking up 4646 as well.

-Scott- 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-ietf-provreg@cafax.se 
> [mailto:owner-ietf-provreg@cafax.se] On Behalf Of Stephane Bortzmeyer
> Sent: Sunday, June 17, 2007 3:27 PM
> To: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
> Cc: bortzmeyer@nic.fr; ietf-provreg@cafax.se; ltru@lists.ietf.org
> Subject: [ietf-provreg] Small bibliography error in RFC 4930
> 
> RFC 4930 has several normative references to RFC 3066.
> 
> RFC 4930 has been approved by the IESG in January 2007 and published
> in May 2007.
> 
> RFC 3066 have been obsoleted by RFC 4646 in September 2006, several
> months before.
>