W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > October 2003

Re: Rough sketch for an I-D (a successor of RFC 3023)

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2003 18:05:11 -0600
To: MURATA Makoto <murata@hokkaido.email.ne.jp>
Cc: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>, www-tag@w3.org
Message-Id: <1067472311.26793.264.camel@dirk.dm93.org>

On Wed, 2003-10-29 at 17:33, MURATA Makoto wrote:
> > MM> I think that further discussion about the content of this I-D
> > MM> should be moved to the IETF-XML-MIME ML.
> > 
> > I prefer a list and a process that I understand well.
> I prefer an IETF ML an RFC at this stage of the game.  First, Ned's 
> update is not an RFC yet.  Second, if we are going to create an RFC 
> (as suggested in the TAG minutes), an IETF ML is a better place.  

I have no strong preference either way, but as far as I know,
the ietf-xml-mime mailing list isn't any more or less
endorsed by the IETF than any other public mailing list.
ietf-xml-mime-request@imc.org is hosted by
the Internet Mail Consortium.


It's not the mailing list of an IETF working group,
nor is it endorsed by the IESG in any particular way,
as far as I know.

Regardless of official endorsement, the scope
of ietf-xml-mime seems to match this task quite
nicely. I guess I mildly prefer ietf-xml-mime to www-tag
for the bulk of the discussion. I'm sure Chris
and others will keep the TAG informed to the extent
we need to know stuff.

Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Wednesday, 29 October 2003 19:05:13 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:32:40 UTC