W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > December 2008

Re: link relationship registration [was: New Version Notification for draft-nottingham-http-link-header-03]

From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2008 13:28:04 +1100
Cc: "ietf-http-wg@w3.org Group" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, Atom Syntax <atom-syntax@imc.org>, www-tag@w3.org, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
Message-Id: <3B7240FB-8C0A-45DD-87F3-D6A416F85689@mnot.net>
To: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>

How about:

		<t>New relation types MUST correspond to a formal publication by a
		   recognized standards body. In the case of registration for the IETF
		   itself, the registration proposal MUST be published as an  
Standards-track RFC.</t>

Note that unlike media types, this does NOT require IESG approval for  
relation types from outside the IETF; rather, just a 'formal  
publication', which AIUI corresponds to the REC track in the W3C (but  
not Notes), OASIS standard, etc.

Feedback appreciated.



On 02/12/2008, at 7:10 AM, Dan Connolly wrote:

>
> On Mon, 2008-12-01 at 12:11 +1100, Mark Nottingham wrote:
> [...]
>> I'm particularly interested in feedback regarding registration
>> requirements, as I think that's the biggest remaining sticking point.
>> Note that it was previously "IESG Approval"; I've changed it to "IETF
>> Review" (nee "IETF Consensus") so that a document is required.  
>> Also, I
>> believe this still accommodates other standards orgs (like the W3C)
>> using their processes to publish documents that register entries,  
>> just
>> as with media types.
>
> That would surprise me; while there is a significant overlap in the
> communities, the IETF does not, in general, accept consensus
> in the W3C community in place of consensus in its own community.
>
> The media type registration spec phrases it this way:
>
>
> 3.1.  Standards Tree
>
>   The standards tree is intended for types of general interest to the
>   Internet community.  Registrations in the standards tree MUST be
>   approved by the IESG and MUST correspond to a formal publication  
> by a
>   recognized standards body.  In the case of registration for the IETF
>   itself ...
>
>
>  -- http://tools.ietf.org/rfcmarkup?doc=4288#page-4
>
>
> -- 
> Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
> gpg D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541  0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E
>
>


--
Mark Nottingham     http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Wednesday, 10 December 2008 02:28:47 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:16:27 GMT