Ignore:
Timestamp:
Jan 1, 2011, 9:23:02 AM (9 years ago)
Author:
julian.reschke@…
Message:

bump up document dates, update to latest version of rfc2629.xslt

Location:
draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp/latest
Files:
2 edited

Legend:

Unmodified
Added
Removed
  • draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp/latest/draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp.html

    r1098 r1099  
    356356  }
    357357  @top-right {
    358        content: "December 2010";
     358       content: "January 2011";
    359359  }
    360360  @top-center {
     
    400400      <link rel="Appendix" title="C Alternative Approaches to Internationalization" href="#rfc.section.C">
    401401      <link rel="Appendix" title="D Change Log (to be removed by RFC Editor before publication)" href="#rfc.section.D">
    402       <meta name="generator" content="http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/rfc2629.xslt, Revision 1.536, 2010-11-29 12:56:12, XSLT vendor: SAXON 8.9 from Saxonica http://www.saxonica.com/">
     402      <meta name="generator" content="http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/rfc2629.xslt, Revision 1.537, 2010-12-30 14:21:59, XSLT vendor: SAXON 8.9 from Saxonica http://www.saxonica.com/">
    403403      <link rel="schema.dct" href="http://purl.org/dc/terms/">
    404404      <meta name="dct.creator" content="Reschke, J. F.">
    405405      <meta name="dct.identifier" content="urn:ietf:id:draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp-latest">
    406       <meta name="dct.issued" scheme="ISO8601" content="2010-12-04">
     406      <meta name="dct.issued" scheme="ISO8601" content="2011-01-01">
    407407      <meta name="dct.abstract" content="HTTP/1.1 defines the Content-Disposition response header field, but points out that it is not part of the HTTP/1.1 Standard. This specification takes over the definition and registration of Content-Disposition, as used in HTTP, and clarifies internationalization aspects.">
    408408      <meta name="description" content="HTTP/1.1 defines the Content-Disposition response header field, but points out that it is not part of the HTTP/1.1 Standard. This specification takes over the definition and registration of Content-Disposition, as used in HTTP, and clarifies internationalization aspects.">
     
    422422               <td class="left">Updates: <a href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2616">2616</a> (if approved)
    423423               </td>
    424                <td class="right">December 4, 2010</td>
     424               <td class="right">January 1, 2011</td>
    425425            </tr>
    426426            <tr>
     
    429429            </tr>
    430430            <tr>
    431                <td class="left">Expires: June 7, 2011</td>
     431               <td class="left">Expires: July 5, 2011</td>
    432432               <td class="right"></td>
    433433            </tr>
     
    458458         in progress”.
    459459      </p>
    460       <p>This Internet-Draft will expire on June 7, 2011.</p>
     460      <p>This Internet-Draft will expire on July 5, 2011.</p>
    461461      <h1><a id="rfc.copyrightnotice" href="#rfc.copyrightnotice">Copyright Notice</a></h1>
    462       <p>Copyright © 2010 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved.</p>
     462      <p>Copyright © 2011 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved.</p>
    463463      <p>This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (<a href="http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info">http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info</a>) in effect on the date of publication of this document. Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights
    464464         and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must include Simplified BSD License
     
    657657                     filename="EURO rates";
    658658                     filename*=utf-8''<b>%e2%82%ac</b>%20rates
    659 </pre>  <p>Note: as of December 2010, those user agents that do not support the RFC 5987 encoding ignore "filename*" when it occurs after
     659</pre>  <p>Note: as of January 2011, those user agents that do not support the RFC 5987 encoding ignore "filename*" when it occurs after
    660660         "filename". Unfortunately, some user agents that do support RFC 5987 do pick the "filename" rather than the "filename*" parameter
    661661         when it occurs first; it is expected that this situation is going to improve soon.
     
    824824      <p id="rfc.section.C.3.p.2">As with the approaches above, this is not interoperable and furthermore risks misinterpreting the actual value.</p>
    825825      <h2 id="rfc.section.C.4"><a href="#rfc.section.C.4">C.4</a>&nbsp;<a id="alternatives.implementations" href="#alternatives.implementations">Implementations (to be removed by RFC Editor before publication)</a></h2>
    826       <p id="rfc.section.C.4.p.1">Unfortunately, as of December 2010, neither the encoding defined in RFCs 2231 and 5987, nor any of the alternate approaches
     826      <p id="rfc.section.C.4.p.1">Unfortunately, as of January 2011, neither the encoding defined in RFCs 2231 and 5987, nor any of the alternate approaches
    827827         discussed above was implemented interoperably. Thus, this specification recommends the approach defined in RFC 5987, which
    828828         at least has the advantage of actually being specified properly.
  • draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp/latest/draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp.xml

    r1098 r1099  
    4242  </author>
    4343
    44   <date month="December" year="2010"/>
     44  <date month="January" year="2011"/>
    4545  <workgroup>HTTPbis Working Group</workgroup>
    4646 
     
    328328</artwork>
    329329<postamble>
    330   Note: as of December 2010, those user agents that do not support the RFC 5987
     330  Note: as of January 2011, those user agents that do not support the RFC 5987
    331331  encoding ignore "filename*" when it occurs after "filename". Unfortunately,
    332332  some user agents that do support RFC 5987 do pick the "filename" rather
     
    742742<section title="Implementations (to be removed by RFC Editor before publication)" anchor="alternatives.implementations">
    743743<t>
    744   Unfortunately, as of December 2010, neither the encoding defined in RFCs 2231
     744  Unfortunately, as of January 2011, neither the encoding defined in RFCs 2231
    745745  and 5987, nor any of the alternate approaches discussed above was
    746746  implemented interoperably. Thus, this specification recommends the approach
Note: See TracChangeset for help on using the changeset viewer.