[rfc-i] [IAB] draft-iab-rfcv3-preptool-latest, "5. What the v3 Prep Tool Does"

Julian Reschke julian.reschke at gmx.de
Thu Apr 14 12:53:21 PDT 2016

On 2016-04-14 21:46, Joe Hildebrand (jhildebr) wrote:
> On 4/12/16, 9:46 AM, "Julian Reschke" <julian.reschke at gmx.de> wrote:
>> On 2016-04-12 16:47, Joe Hildebrand (jhildebr) wrote:
>>> Can we at least normalize the common case (English month names)?  Other values can be allowed, but those will always be detectable as not-useful-for-math very quickly after normalization.
>> I think a cleaner solution would be to leave the dates in references
>> alone. What's the point in rewriting them?
> This came up during the IAB review of the document set.  A couple of people complained about English month names being used for date semantics, rather than just local display.  I would be ok with this only applying to /rfc/front/date, if that makes a difference.


The issue here (and something the reviewer potentially wasn't aware of) 
is the document's <date> and <date> in <reference>s are only similar. 
The former is used for date calculations (expiry), the latter is not. 
The latter allows "vague" syntax, the former does not.

This makes it problematic to rewrite "January" to "1" inside 
<reference>, as it looses information.

Best regards, Julian

More information about the rfc-interest mailing list