Hi,
It does seem worth mentioning that the WHATWG URI/URL work exists, is
somewhat popular, and may differ from the IETF work. How much the authors
want to go into this rathole, I'm not sure.
As it's a "living standard", for better or worse, this was just edited a
bit:
On Tue, Dec 27, 2022 at 03:31:37PM +0300, Valery Smyslov wrote:
> From: John C Klensin [mailto:john-i...@jck.com]
>
> (2) The document makes several references to URIs, but only RFC
> 3986 appears to be referenced. In the real world in which
> certificates are established and used and in which
> Thanks for taking the time to provide feedback and my apologies for the
delayed reply. Comments inline.
Ditto what Peter said. I'll try to read more during this week (sigh, Nomcom),
but just on one issue:
>> (2) The document makes several references to URIs, but only RFC
>> 3986 appears
Hi John,
Thanks for taking the time to provide feedback and my apologies for the
delayed reply. Comments inline.
On 12/27/22 8:21 AM, John C Klensin wrote:
Valery,
Thanks. In skimming back through this, I noticed several typos
and evidence of editorial carelessness. The ones that might be
Valery,
Thanks. In skimming back through this, I noticed several typos
and evidence of editorial carelessness. The ones that might be
unclear are:
* In (3) "other local deviations and (claimed) translation
strategies" should have been "other local deviations and
(claimed) transition
Hi,
below is an unofficial I18NDIR review of the draft,
performed by John Klensin (forwarded here with his permission).
Thanks to John for doing this review.
Regards,
Valery.
-Original Message-
From: John C Klensin [mailto:john-i...@jck.com]
Sent: Monday, December 26, 2022 9:53 PM
To:
