public-iri@w3.org from January 2012 by author

Chris Weber

• Re: HTML5 and URI scheme *name* prefixes (Monday, 30 January)
• IETF 83 request for participation (Tuesday, 24 January)
• Re: HTML5 and URI scheme *name* prefixes (Monday, 16 January)

Claus Färber

• Re: [iri] #73: Decide on organization-specific schemes (Thursday, 5 January)

internet-drafts@ietf.org

• I-D Action: draft-ietf-iri-3987bis-09.txt (Monday, 9 January)

iri issue tracker

• Re: [iri] #71: Typo in ABNF production (Wednesday, 25 January)
• Re: [iri] #72: Another typo in ABNF production (Wednesday, 25 January)
• Re: [iri] #76: Fix reference to RFC 5378 (Wednesday, 25 January)
• Re: [iri] #99: New schemes should make sure query part uses UTF-8 (Wednesday, 25 January)
• Re: [iri] #75: Historical registrations and RFC 2119 lang (Wednesday, 25 January)
• Re: [iri] #108: Add 'submitter' and 'owner' columns to 'URI/IRI Scheme Registration Template' (Wednesday, 25 January)
• Re: [iri] #88: A number of ABNF issues in 3987bis (Thursday, 12 January)
• Re: [iri] #93: clarify which characters are disallowed vs. not recommended (Thursday, 12 January)
• Re: [iri] #103: u+FFFE and u+FFFF missing in section 6 (Thursday, 12 January)
• Re: [iri] #104: Characters are still excluded from URIs (Thursday, 12 January)
• Re: [iri] #75: Historical registrations and RFC 2119 lang (Wednesday, 11 January)
• Re: [iri] #75: Historical registrations and RFC 2119 lang (Wednesday, 11 January)
• Re: [iri] #76: Fix reference to RFC 5378 (Wednesday, 11 January)
• Re: [iri] #71: Typo in ABNF production (Wednesday, 11 January)
• Re: [iri] #72: Another typo in ABNF production (Wednesday, 11 January)
• Re: [iri] #82: Use of ":" in scheme specs (Wednesday, 11 January)
• Re: [iri] #77: Change controller in IESG-approved schemes specs (Wednesday, 11 January)
• Re: [iri] #64: Disallow registration of URI schemes with generic names 'uri', 'url', etc. (Wednesday, 11 January)
• Re: [iri] #84: No retroactivity (Wednesday, 11 January)
• Re: [iri] #74: Resolving ambiguous registrations (Wednesday, 11 January)
• Re: [iri] #60: Should we recommend using different ABNF rule names to clarify escaping? (Wednesday, 11 January)
• Re: [iri] #100: Reduce review period to two weeks? (Wednesday, 11 January)
• Re: [iri] #84: No retroactivity (Wednesday, 11 January)
• Re: [iri] #69: Several issues in Introduction of 4395bis (Wednesday, 11 January)

Julian Reschke

• Re: HTML5 and URI scheme *name* prefixes (Monday, 16 January)
• HTML5 and URI scheme *name* prefixes (Saturday, 14 January)

Martin J. Dürst

• Re: HTML5 and URI scheme *name* prefixes (Friday, 20 January)
• Re: Moved back to section about LEIRIs (Monday, 9 January)
• Moved back to section about LEIRIs (Monday, 9 January)

Mykyta Yevstifeyev

• Re: HTML5 and URI scheme *name* prefixes (Saturday, 14 January)

Peter Saint-Andre

• Re: [iri] #76: Fix reference to RFC 5378 (Wednesday, 25 January)
• Re: [iri] #85: Align terminology in 3987bis with 3536bis (Friday, 13 January)
• Re: [iri] #84: No retroactivity (Wednesday, 11 January)
• Re: [iri] #69: Several issues in Introduction of 4395bis (Wednesday, 11 January)

Ted Hardie

• Re: [iri] #93: clarify which characters are disallowed vs. not recommended (Thursday, 12 January)

Last message date: Monday, 30 January 2012 22:39:51 UTC