[rfc-i] Deprecated pieces and PIs [was: Re: Input Syntax vs Canonical Form/rfcedstyle vs Output Formats]

Julian Reschke julian.reschke at gmx.de
Sun May 4 07:49:50 PDT 2014


On 2014-05-02 18:08, Elwyn Davies wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2014-05-02 at 07:57 -0500, Dave Crocker wrote:
>
>> pps.  The long list of deprecated features is distressing.  Given the
>> earlier discussions, it never occurred to me that there would be so
>> little concern for staying compatible with the installed base.  But
>> then, the IETF seems to have largely lost its appreciation for the role
>> of operational stability...
>>
> As I understand the specification, the pieces that are labeled as
> 'deprecated' MUST be implemented in v3 processors and the syntax and
> semantics will be as defined in the v2 specification.  Consequently
> existing v1 and v2 documents ought to be able to be processed by a v3
> processor (see para 6 of s1.1).  This seems to have an adequate eye to
> operational stability; unfortunately I think the eye was slightly
> blinkered...
>
> Boringly, achieving full backwards compatibility will mean the v3
> processor has to implement the old v1/v2 processing instructions that
> have been deprecated or moved into the grammar in v3.

No. The old processing instructions are just that, instructions to a 
specific processor. They are not part of RFC2629 nor of RFC2629bis.

> ...

Best regards, Julian


More information about the rfc-interest mailing list