W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > September 2002

Re: Proposed changes to Internet Media Type registration, consistency of use

From: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2002 16:10:45 +0200
Message-ID: <2910689078.20020905161045@w3.org>
To: www-tag@w3.org, Joseph Reagle <reagle@w3.org>
CC: "Ian B. Jacobs" <ij@w3.org>

On Wednesday, September 4, 2002, 5:58:42 PM, Joseph wrote:


JR> On Wednesday 04 September 2002 11:35 am, Ian B. Jacobs wrote:
>> 1) Changes to registration requirements in light of
>>     a better understanding of interactions between
>>     W3C, IETF, and IANA processes. Joseph Reagle
>>     has written a document entitled ""How to Register a
>>     Media Type with IANA" [4].

JR> Ian, removing the particulars and referring to this document instead 
JR> satisfies my concerns with the TAG finding. (However, I'll note I'm not yet 
JR> confident that there is agreement from the IESG about the particulars of 
JR> [4].) My only concern is with the comprehensibility of "no later than" 
JR> sentences -- the always muddle me!

>>       "The IETF registration forms MUST be available for
>>        review along with the specification no later than
>>        Candidate Recommendation (or at last call if the
>>        Working Group expects to advance directly to Proposed
>>        Recommendation). The IETF registration forms SHOULD be
>>        available for review no later than last call."

JR> "The media type registration information SHOULD be available for review 
JR> during W3C Last Call and MUST be available prior to W3C Candidate 
JR> Recommendation."

JR> (Skipping "CR" is a (theoretical?) exception/possibility and I don't see any 
JR> need to qualify every bit of process with it.)

But removing the part about CR would allow this material to be
produced just as the document enters PR which is too late, since it
was not available during the time of CR.

Skipping CR is possible but you still need to meet the CR exit
criteria, or otherwise have your implementation report all in order. I
tend more and more to think that CR should not be optional. It should
be required, but it should be possible to pass through it in zero time
if you meet its exit requirements already before you enter it. Such a
change would certainly make discussions like this a whole lot easier.

-- 
 Chris                            mailto:chris@w3.org
Received on Thursday, 5 September 2002 10:10:57 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 12:47:11 GMT