W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > March 2011

Re: Working Group Decision on ISSUE-101 us-ascii-ref

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2011 16:41:37 +0100
Message-ID: <4D7F88B1.9060600@gmx.de>
To: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
CC: HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
On 15.03.2011 16:13, Sam Ruby wrote:
> ...
> This leaves us with two strong and rather orthogonal objections. We
> then turned to look at what the practical implications would be if each
> were adopted. Despite not being a "definition", we found no statement
> to the effect that RFC 1345 is not useful for the purpose of an
> informative reference. We did find statements that referencing a
> for-pay spec would cause less people to actually make use of the
> reference.
> ...

So do you consider the reference to be non-normative? In that case, a 
bug should be raised to mark it as such.

> === Arguments not considered:
> ...
> While it was not found to be the strongest objection, the fact that the
> IETF no longer considers this RFC to be official is a serious issue is a
> strong objection that merits consideration by the Working Group.
> ...

...meaning what?

Best regards, Julian
Received on Tuesday, 15 March 2011 15:42:14 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:39:23 UTC