Subject: [lemonade] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC5616 (2077)

From: RFC Errata System <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2010 03:55:33 -0700 (PDT)

The following errata report has been submitted for RFC5616,
"Streaming Internet Messaging Attachments".

--------------------------------------
You may review the report below and at:
http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=5616&eid=2077

--------------------------------------
Type: Editorial
Reported by: Alfred Hoenes <[email-masked]>

Section: 7 (pg. 27)

Original Text
-------------
 |           ..., and between the client the media server.
                                        ^

Corrected Text
--------------
|            ..., and between the client and the media server.
                                        ^^^^^

Notes
-----
Additionally, in order to more easily locate the document, it would
have been very useful for prospective readers to find the primary
protocol to which this RFC relates mentioned already in the
document title, e.g.:

OLD:
                Streaming Internet Messaging Attachments

NEW:

  Internet Message Access Protocol (IMAP): Streaming Message Attachments

Instructions:
-------------
This errata is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please
use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or
rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party (IESG)
can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary. 

--------------------------------------
RFC5616 (draft-ietf-lemonade-streaming-13)
--------------------------------------
Title               : Streaming Internet Messaging Attachments
Publication Date    : August 2009
Author(s)           : N. Cook
Category            : INFORMATIONAL
Source              : Enhancements to Internet email to support diverse service environments
Area                : Applications
Stream              : IETF
Verifying Party     : IESG

---

From: Neil Cook <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2010 11:33:41 +0000

I have no problem with the first errata. 

Regarding the change in title, that's more difficult since the document actually refers to IMAP and SIP almost equally. However if modifying the title helps folks to find the document more easily then I don't mind at all, especially since most of the other Lemonade RFCs refer to IMAP in the title.

Neil

---

From: Alfred Hönes <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2010 13:21:31 +0100 (MEZ)

Neil,
thanks for yoyr quick response.

> Regarding the change in title, that's more difficult since the
> document actually refers to IMAP and SIP almost equally.  However
> if modifying the title helps folks to find the document more easily
> then I don't mind at all, especially since most of the other
> Lemonade RFCs refer to IMAP in the title.
>
> Neil

Well, I did (and do) not expect an actual change now; RFCs never
change; and I do not expect a change in the RFC index as well.
The comment was "it would have been very useful", and this note
deliberately was not filed as an Errata Note of its own; this
Erratum after all is expected to become a "keep for update" note.
If the argument is heard and considered in the future, it will be
to the benefit of the readers.

  Alfred.