- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2009 08:58:57 -0600
- To: webmaster@ietf.org
- Cc: public-ietf-w3c <public-ietf-w3c@w3.org>, Joseph A Holsten <joseph@josephholsten.com>, Lachlan Hunt <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au>
The spam in the uri-review archive is causing editors of potential new schemes to back away from using it, even though per RFC 4395 it's the official forum. http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc4395.txt -------- Forwarded Message -------- > From: Joseph A Holsten <joseph@josephholsten.com> > To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> > Cc: HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, Lachlan > Hunt <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au> > Subject: Re: Registering the about: URI scheme > Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2009 08:04:26 -0600 > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > Julian, > Everything sounds fine, some questions inline. > > Julian Reschke wrote: > > - on the front page, note where feedback should go (IMHO the best > > place would be the IETF uri-review mailing list) > I haven't seen any other draft do this, so I'm unsure of where should > this go. Abstract? uri-review sounds fine. Too bad the place is a > spam haven: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/uri-review -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/ gpg D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541 0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E
Received on Tuesday, 27 January 2009 14:59:07 UTC