Link: http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/httpbis/trac/ticket/8
Origin: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/ietf-http-wg-old/2000SepDec/0013.html
Component: non-specific
In the description of Internet Media Types in [section 3.7], the wrong RFC is cited for the media type registration process. The text says:
Media-type values are registered with the Internet Assigned Number Authority (IANA [19]). The media type registration process is outlined in RFC 4288 [17]. Use of non-registered media types is discouraged.
But should be:
Media-type values are registered with the Internet Assigned Number Authority (IANA [19]). The media type registration process is outlined in RFC 2048 [17]. Use of non-registered media types is discouraged.
The cited Reference [section 17] is also incorrect; it is:
[17] Postel, J., "Media Type Registration Procedure", RFC 1590,
November 1996.
(oddly, the date cited is wrong for that RFC and correct for the right one) It should be:
[17] Freed, N., Klensin, J., and Postel, J., "Mulitpurpose Internet Mail
Extensions (MIME) Part Four: Registration Procedure", RFC 2048,
November 1996.
Fixed in [74]
From [152]:
Resolve #35: categorize RFC1737 (URN) as informative, RFC4288 (media type registration procedure) as normative (closes #35). Also update and re-organize media type registration for application/http and message/http to use RFC4288 template (relates to #8).
RFC4288 is not normative -- it specifies an administrative procedure, not a protocol, and thus does not set any HTTP requirements.