W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > August 2009

Re: ISSUE-56: urls-webarch - suggest closing on 2009-09-03

From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2009 01:25:39 -0700
Cc: "public-html@w3.org WG" <public-html@w3.org>, "Michael(tm) Smith" <mike@w3.org>
Message-id: <B80F3E19-7F5B-417D-9D23-C81BBD20DB12@apple.com>
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>

On Aug 21, 2009, at 1:18 AM, Julian Reschke wrote:

> Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
>> On Aug 21, 2009, at 12:25 AM, Julian Reschke wrote:
>>> Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
>>>> ...
>>>> Do you believe the following changes would be appropriate and  
>>>> sufficient to resolve the issue, if made:
>>>> 1) Replace references to WEBADDRESS with references to IRIbis.
>>>
>>> Yes.
>> http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=7391
>> (I believe this is blocked on an IRIbis update.)
>
> And has already been set to "resolved" by Ian. It's not.

I don't really understand what the REMIND resolution means so I'm not  
going to mess with it. However, it seems in any case this is blocked  
on an update of IRIbis to address comments.

>
>>>> 2) Replace term URL with something either matching IRIbis or at  
>>>> least not conflicting.
>>>
>>> Yes.
>> http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=7392
>
> This one already has been set to "WONTFIX" by the author.
>
> Maybe moving over to Bugzilla doesn't really help in dealing with  
> these issues.
>
>>>> If so, then I'll file bugs for these suggested changes. #1 may  
>>>> require a sufficiently updated version of IRIbis.
>>>
>>> <http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-duerst-iri-bis-06#section-7.4>
>> Apparently this is not yet sufficient, see <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Jul/0808.html 
>> >.
>
> I do not disagree that there is a problem. But we're not going to  
> resolve it by closing issue 56 until we're there.

I agree that in light of subsequent discussion we can't yet close  
ISSUE-56. We need (a) progress on IRIbis, or else further advancement  
for the Web Address spec; (b) some sort of group agreement on whether  
using the term URL in a nonstandard way is livable, and if not what  
term should be used instead. I will leave (b) to the Chairs.

Regards,
Maciej
Received on Friday, 21 August 2009 08:26:22 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 10 October 2014 16:24:51 UTC