In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "St eve Cohen" writes: >Another RFC document of interest is = >http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2640.txt. >I at first thought that this document might be heading down the paths I = >was looking at, but alas, it is approaching i18n only from the point of = >view of character sets used, it has nothing to do with date formats. In = >any case, its recommendations have not been widely adopted.
I haven't followed the developments in the protocol for a long while. It looks like there is an FTPEXT Working Group, which produced the RFC you referenced. They produced a draft of an extended directory listing format that would be consistent across servers, but it's never moved to the RFC stage: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ftpext-mlst-16.txt The working group status page seems to indicate that they had intended to get the extended directory listing draft considered for distribution as an RFC at the end of 1997: http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/ftpext-charter.html For whatever reason, this has dragged on for half a decade. daniel --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
