W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > March 2004

RE: application/rdf+xml registration

From: Scott Hollenbeck <sah@428cobrajet.net>
Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2004 06:51:59 -0500 (EST)
To: "'Graham Klyne'" <gk@ninebynine.org>, "'Ted Hardie'" <hardie@qualcomm.com>
Cc: "'RDF core WG'" <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>, "'aaron Swartz'" <me@aaronsw.com>, <ned.freed@mrochek.com>
Message-ID: <5BEA6CDB196A4241B8BE129D309AA4AF02E0F11A@vsvapostal8.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com>




Graham,

> Can you please indicate how we should proceed?

I'll shepherd this.  Since I'm not all that familiar with this history of
the document, I'd prefer to use the procedures described in
draft-freed-mime-p4-04.txt.  That document is sitting in the RFC Editor's
queue in anticipation of obsoleting RFC 2048.  I don't think that means
anything specific to this document would change other than the reference to
2048 (Ned -- would you agree?).

There is one other thing that I found confusing.  The registration template
includes this text:

Optional parameters: charset

   Same as charset parameter of application/xml.

Encoding considerations:

   Same as charset parameter of application/xml.

Yet there is no mention of a reference to RFC 3023, the specification that
includes the registration template for application/xml.  There should
probably be one.

Anyway, we can treat this document as an individual submission to the IESG
for publication as an Informational document as you requested.  That means
I'll adopt it, request an IETF-wide last call (consider my comments above
last call comments), and we'll follow the usual IESG review and approval
procedures from there.

-Scott-
Received on Wednesday, 17 March 2004 16:15:16 EST

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 17 March 2004 16:15:18 EST