Re: Report on testing of the link relations registry

On 17.08.2010 01:25, Silvia Pfeiffer wrote:
> Eventually all registries held by a standards organisation go the same
> way and become bureaucratic and difficult to use, because that is a way
> to protect against spam registrations (and other annoying stuff). I
> believe if we set up another registry, we will eventually run into the
> same problems - not to speak of potential conflict with the existing
> IANA registry. So, what is the next generation of Web standards
> developers to do? Create a Google wave based registry on top of the then
> existing two registries? (yes, I know, Google wave is dead - I'm just
> using it as a placeholder for the "next big technology for document
> authoring on the Internet").
>
> Isn't there a better way where we can help IANA fix their registry to do
> what we need it to achieve? Isn't this what harmonisation between
> standards bodies is all about? Also, I'm not suggesting that Ian should
> do this - in fact, I think this is totally the job of somebody in a
> different position to an editor in the W3C. It's good to know where it's
> up - but I think now it's time to plan with IANA a new process that
> allows us all to move into the future.

Silvia,

out of curiosity: as somebody not involved in the last 4 weeks of 
discussion what's your opinion about whether there's something wrong 
with the registry? (considering it was just created, so we don't have 
any additional data than these attempts yet)

Best regards, Julian

Received on Tuesday, 17 August 2010 06:40:13 UTC