Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

links for in-text "Section X ... RFC Y" references have wrong targets #38

Open
chrislandis opened this issue May 24, 2024 · 0 comments
Open

Comments

@chrislandis
Copy link

This issue reports a datatracker issue #4543 in the relevant project.

The above linked datatracker issue uses RFC 8252 as an example of the problem. The opening paragraph (abstract) of RFC 7817 provides a more comprehensive example of how in-text references to "section X ... RFC Y" do not correctly render as hyperlinks:

This document describes the Transport Layer Security (TLS) server identity verification procedure for SMTP Submission, IMAP, POP, and ManageSieve clients. It replaces Section 2.4 (Server Identity Check) of RFC 2595 and updates Section 4.1 (Processing After the STARTTLS Command) of RFC 3207, Section 11.1 (STARTTLS Security Considerations) of RFC 3501, and Section 2.2.1 (Server Identity Check) of RFC 5804.

Here is what I'm seeing that is wrong:

  • The first misdirected link is on the text "Section 2.4." It points to the current RFC's section 2.4 instead of section 2.4 of RFC 2595, which is the correct target.
  • The same is true of the link on the text "Section 4.1" pointing to the local section 4.1 instead of section 4.1 in RFC 3207.
  • The next link is on the text "RFC 3207, Section 11.1." The comma here separates references in the list such that "RFC 3207" goes with previous text and "Section 11.1" goes with the text that follows. They are unrelated. Coincidentally, RFC 3207 does not have 11 sections.
  • The last misdirected link in this abstract is on the text "Section 2.2.1" and is the same problem as described in the first two bullets here.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant