Ignore:
Timestamp:
Mar 1, 2011, 1:24:49 AM (9 years ago)
Author:
julian.reschke@…
Message:

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

File:
1 edited

Legend:

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

    r1143 r1145  
    9494  margin-left: 2em;
    9595  margin-right: 2em;
     96}
     97ol.la {
     98  list-style-type: lower-alpha;
     99}
     100ol.ua {
     101  list-style-type: upper-alpha;
    96102}
    97103ol p {
     
    356362  }
    357363  @top-right {
    358        content: "February 2011";
     364       content: "March 2011";
    359365  }
    360366  @top-center {
     
    365371  }
    366372  @bottom-center {
    367        content: "Expires August 30, 2011";
     373       content: "Expires September 2, 2011";
    368374  }
    369375  @bottom-right {
     
    402408      <link rel="Appendix" title="D Advice on Generating Content-Disposition Header Fields" href="#rfc.section.D">
    403409      <link rel="Appendix" title="E Change Log (to be removed by RFC Editor before publication)" href="#rfc.section.E">
    404       <meta name="generator" content="http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/rfc2629.xslt, Revision 1.540, 2011-01-10 09:27:20, XSLT vendor: SAXON 8.9 from Saxonica http://www.saxonica.com/">
     410      <meta name="generator" content="http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/rfc2629.xslt, Revision 1.543, 2011-02-18 21:03:40, XSLT vendor: SAXON 8.9 from Saxonica http://www.saxonica.com/">
    405411      <link rel="schema.dct" href="http://purl.org/dc/terms/">
    406412      <meta name="dct.creator" content="Reschke, J. F.">
    407413      <meta name="dct.identifier" content="urn:ietf:id:draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp-latest">
    408       <meta name="dct.issued" scheme="ISO8601" content="2011-02-26">
     414      <meta name="dct.issued" scheme="ISO8601" content="2011-03-01">
    409415      <meta name="dct.abstract" content="RFC 2616 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.">
    410416      <meta name="description" content="RFC 2616 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.">
     
    424430               <td class="left">Updates: <a href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2616">2616</a> (if approved)
    425431               </td>
    426                <td class="right">February 26, 2011</td>
     432               <td class="right">March 1, 2011</td>
    427433            </tr>
    428434            <tr>
     
    431437            </tr>
    432438            <tr>
    433                <td class="left">Expires: August 30, 2011</td>
     439               <td class="left">Expires: September 2, 2011</td>
    434440               <td class="right"></td>
    435441            </tr>
     
    449455         list is at &lt;<a href="http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/query?component=content-disp">http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/query?component=content-disp</a>&gt; and related documents (including fancy diffs) can be found at &lt;<a href="http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/">http://tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/</a>&gt;.
    450456      </p> 
    451       <p>The changes in this draft are summarized in <a href="#changes.since.05" title="Since draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp-05">Appendix&nbsp;E.10</a>.
     457      <p>The changes in this draft are summarized in <a href="#changes.since.06" title="Since draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp-06">Appendix&nbsp;E.11</a>.
    452458      </p>
    453459      <h1><a id="rfc.status" href="#rfc.status">Status of This Memo</a></h1>
     
    460466         in progress”.
    461467      </p>
    462       <p>This Internet-Draft will expire on August 30, 2011.</p>
     468      <p>This Internet-Draft will expire on September 2, 2011.</p>
    463469      <h1><a id="rfc.copyrightnotice" href="#rfc.copyrightnotice">Copyright Notice</a></h1>
    464470      <p>Copyright © 2011 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved.</p>
     
    518524               <li>E.9&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#changes.since.04">Since draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp-04</a></li>
    519525               <li>E.10&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#changes.since.05">Since draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp-05</a></li>
     526               <li>E.11&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="#changes.since.06">Since draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp-06</a></li>
    520527            </ul>
    521528         </li>
     
    839846      <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>
    840847      <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>
    841       <p id="rfc.section.C.4.p.1">Unfortunately, as of February 2011, neither the encoding defined in RFCs 2231 and 5987, nor any of the alternate approaches
    842          discussed above was implemented interoperably. Thus, this specification recommends the approach defined in RFC 5987, which
    843          at least has the advantage of actually being specified properly.
     848      <p id="rfc.section.C.4.p.1">Unfortunately, as of March 2011, neither the encoding defined in RFCs 2231 and 5987, nor any of the alternate approaches discussed
     849         above was implemented interoperably. Thus, this specification recommends the approach defined in RFC 5987, which at least
     850         has the advantage of actually being specified properly.
    844851      </p>
    845852      <p id="rfc.section.C.4.p.2">The table below shows the implementation support for the various approaches:</p>
     
    10111018      </p>
    10121019      <p id="rfc.section.E.10.p.2">Added appendix "Advice on Generating Content-Disposition Header Fields".</p>
     1020      <h2 id="rfc.section.E.11"><a href="#rfc.section.E.11">E.11</a>&nbsp;<a id="changes.since.06" href="#changes.since.06">Since draft-ietf-httpbis-content-disp-06</a></h2>
     1021      <p id="rfc.section.E.11.p.1">None yet.</p>
    10131022      <h1 id="rfc.index"><a href="#rfc.index">Index</a></h1>
    10141023      <p class="noprint"><a href="#rfc.index.C">C</a> <a href="#rfc.index.H">H</a> <a href="#rfc.index.I">I</a> <a href="#rfc.index.R">R</a>
Note: See TracChangeset for help on using the changeset viewer.