RE: signature.asc files
From: Douglas Furlong (douglas.furlong_at_firebox.com)
Date: 04/27/04
- Previous message: Rodolfo J. Paiz: "There is a better way! (was: RE: Hugh's long sig)"
- In reply to: Rui Miguel Seabra: "RE: signature.asc files"
- Next in thread: Rui Miguel Seabra: "RE: signature.asc files"
- Reply: Rui Miguel Seabra: "RE: signature.asc files"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
To: For users of Fedora Core releases <fedora-list@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 27 Apr 2004 15:59:49 +0100
> > RFC's are guidelines, not standards. I have not seeing any software out
> > there that adheres 100% to the RFC's, there are always relaxed
> > interpretations.
>
> HTTP 1.1 is a standard. Right? Wrong?
>
>
> Right! The standard is RFC 2616 IIRC.
> ^^^
>
Just a tiny point, just because some thing has an RFC, and is a
standard, does not mean it's a standard due to the existence of the RFC.
Doug
-- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
- Previous message: Rodolfo J. Paiz: "There is a better way! (was: RE: Hugh's long sig)"
- In reply to: Rui Miguel Seabra: "RE: signature.asc files"
- Next in thread: Rui Miguel Seabra: "RE: signature.asc files"
- Reply: Rui Miguel Seabra: "RE: signature.asc files"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
