Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
A given Internet Standard, STD n, may be RFCs x and y at a given time, but later the same standard may be updated to be RFC z instead. For example, in 2007 RFC 3700 was an Internet Standard—STD 1—and in May 2008 it was replaced with RFC 5000, so RFC 3700 changed to Historic, RFC 5000 became an Internet Standard, and as of May 2008 STD 1 is ...
RFC 1950 : ZLIB Compressed Data Format Specification version 3.3: May 1996: Zlib v 3.3: RFC 1951 : DEFLATE Compressed Data Format Specification version 1.3: May 1996: DEFLATE v 1.3: RFC 1952 : GZIP file format specification version 4.3: May 1996: Gzip v 4.3: RFC 1964 : The Kerberos Version 5 GSS-API Mechanism: June 1996: Kerberos; GSSAPI: RFC ...
There are many acceptable ways to format an RfC discussion. Below is one example of how a simple RfC discussion could appear when you are editing the talk page. This example will work best for average or smaller discussions; for major disputes, other, more structured formats may be more appropriate.
Since 1992, a new document was written to specify the evolution of the basic protocol towards its next full version. It supported both the simple request method of the 0.9 version and the full GET request that included the client HTTP version. This was the first of the many unofficial HTTP/1.0 drafts that preceded the final work on HTTP/1.0. [3]
The final revised documentation for PDF 1.7 was approved by ISO Technical Committee 171 in January 2008 and published as ISO 32000-1:2008 on July 1, 2008, and titled Document management – Portable document format – Part 1: PDF 1.7. ISO 32000-1:2008 is the first ISO standard for full function PDF.
Short title: example derived form Ghostscript examples: Image title: derivative of Ghostscript examples "text_graphic_image.pdf", "alphabet.ps" and "waterfal.ps"
Partisan politics hindered the RFC's efforts, though in 1932, monetary conditions improved because the RFC slowed the decline in the nation's money supply. The original legislation establishing the RFC did not limit it to lending to financial institutions; it was also authorized to provide loans for railroad construction and crop lands.
Your own opinions should be posted in a separate comment, not in the question itself. (The question is the part of the page shown on one of the RFC listing pages, such as Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Biographies.) Any publicizing of the RfC should also be neutral. One option is to say only that input is requested, with a link to the RfC.