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 ...
More recently, letters have mainly been written on paper: handwritten and more recently typed. There is a wealth of letters and instructional materials (for example, manuals, as in the medieval ars dictaminis) on letter writing throughout history. The study of letter writing usually involves both the study of rhetoric and grammar. [6]
This article cites its sources but its page reference ranges are too broad or incorrect. Please help in adding a more precise page range. (July 2024) (Learn how and when to remove this message) Survey of eight prominent scripts (left to right, top to bottom): Sumerian cuneiform, Egyptian hieroglyphs, Chinese characters, Maya script, Devanagari, Latin alphabet, Arabic alphabet, Braille Part of ...
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.
Larry Melvin Masinter is an early internet pioneer and ACM Fellow. [1] After attending Stanford University, [2] he became a principal scientist [3] of Xerox Artificial Intelligence Systems and author or coauthor of 26 of the Internet Engineering Task Force's Requests for Comments.
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]
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.