Hi Authors, Daniel - We have noted your approval on the AUTH48 status page: https://www.rfc-editor.org/auth48/rfc9787
All - Per feedback from Deb (AD), we have removed one instance of “traditional” (to reflect RFC-to-be 9788) and replaced other instances with “classic”. Please review and let us know if any further updates are needed. — FILES (please refresh) — The files have been posted here: https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9787.xml https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9787.txt https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9787.html https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9787.pdf The relevant diff files have been posted here: https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9787-diff.html (comprehensive diff) https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9787-auth48diff.html (AUTH48 changes) https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9787-auth48rfcdiff.html (AUTH48 changes side by side) https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9787-lastdiff.html (last version to this one) https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9787-lastrfcdiff.html (rfcdiff between last version and this) Thank you, RFC Editor/ap > On Jun 8, 2025, at 2:36 AM, Deb Cooley <debcool...@gmail.com> wrote: > > And just in case you missed it.... I'm attaching my message from Tuesday. > > Deb > > On Fri, Jun 6, 2025 at 7:09 PM Daniel Kahn Gillmor <d...@fifthhorseman.net> > wrote: > Hi Alanna-- > > On Mon 2025-06-02 14:14:31 -0700, Alanna Paloma wrote: > > ) “IMAP” and “SMTP” are considered well-known abbreviations and > > therefore do not require expansions. > > > > See here for more information on abbreviations: > > https://www.rfc-editor.org/rpc/wiki/doku.php?id=abbrev_list > > OK, that seems fine to me :) > > > To match the companion document RFC-to-be 9788, we have updated to > > “Non-Structural Header Field”. > > > > Additionally, we have added a definition for “Non-Structural Header > > Field” in the Terminology section, per Bernie’s request in the AUTH48 > > thread of RFC-to-be 9788 (see > > <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/auth48archive/mHJq9YpnEB-vSl2pIeLZSWFzpIE/>). > > Please > > review and confirm that the text is satisfactory. > > Thanks, this is a nice and tidy cleanup. I approve. > > --dkg > <[AD] Inclusive language in RFC-to-be 9787 > <draft-ietf-lamps-e2e-mail-guidance-17.eml> -- auth48archive mailing list -- auth48archive@rfc-editor.org To unsubscribe send an email to auth48archive-le...@rfc-editor.org
