W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > January to March 2008

Re: PROCESS: Tracking design issues under discussion

From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2008 16:58:13 +1100
Cc: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <CA50659A-D0A2-4F6E-9611-23C9FA980C88@mnot.net>
To: "Frank Ellermann" <hmdmhdfmhdjmzdtjmzdtzktdkztdjz@gmail.com>

On 15/02/2008, at 11:50 AM, Frank Ellermann wrote:
> Fine.  Some related questions:
> - Is the Wiki supposed to be a tool for the editors + Chairs, or
>  should all here try to get an account or whatever it takes for
>  write access ?  [ Better keep it for the editors + Chair ;-) ]

Right now, anyone who wants to get a tools account can comment on open  
issues and work on the wiki. Having said that, I do see it primarily  
as a tool for the chair and editors, as well as for WG members to keep  
up with what we're doing. I'm not particularly against folks adding to  
what's there, as long as it's in-scope and useful, but discussion and  
decisions need to happen on the list, so I'm not sure what the benefit  
would be. What did you have in mind?

> - What's going to happen with the old "outsourced" errata ?  One
>  2617 erratum has a major impact on various Internet protocols,
>  compare <http://article.gmane.org/gmane.ietf.sasl/3007>.

Good question. The 2617 errata still stands at Scott's URI <http://skrb.org/ietf/http_errata.html 
 >, but it hasn't been transferred to our list, since it's not in our  
scope (yet, at least).

> - Julian proposed to split the question of "default Latin-1"
>  from issues related to "line break" conventions (over HTTP),
>  is the latter already tracked separately ?

Not IIRC; I've been on the road for a couple of weeks, so have fallen  
a bit behind on the issues list. I'll get it up there ASAP.

> - several folks demanded to kill UTF-7 a.s.a.p. at odd places not
>  limited to HTTP and "HTML 5".  Can we have a clear decision that
>  this should be done generally, once and for all, allowing HTTP
>  and "HTML5" to reference a document doing this as they see fit ?

My initial feeling is that apps-discuss might be a good place to bring  
that up; while we could publish a document that makes recommendations,  
if it really is bigger than HTTP, it probably deserves a bigger venue.


Mark Nottingham     http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Tuesday, 19 February 2008 05:58:40 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 11:10:44 UTC