- From: Roy T. Fielding <fielding@gbiv.com>
- Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2007 11:31:38 -0700
- To: Sam Hartman <hartmans-ietf@mit.edu>
- Cc: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, Lisa Dusseault <lisa@osafoundation.org>, IESG IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, "ietf-http-wg@w3.org Group" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On Oct 17, 2007, at 10:49 AM, Sam Hartman wrote: > Another important aspect of the charter scope constraint is to make > sure that if the scope is expanded to include new headers or methods, > the entire IETF community is notified so people not currently > participating in the effort can join. There is no scope currently. After the IESG makes its decision, then the approved charter is sent to the IETF community and thereby notified of the scope by that charter. > As such, I believe it is appropriate for the IETF community to place > this constraint on the HTTP working group. Your logic escapes me. I think it is important for the IESG to realize that the IETF community is not yet even fully aware that the working group has been proposed, let alone all of the private discussions that went into proposing that specific charter. There are less than one percent of current HTTP implementations represented on the old mailing list. When the WG is approved and people start reporting on it as an active group rather than just a bunch of folks with an interest, then there will be awareness and I agree that any changes at that point would indeed require rechartering. That's why I am suggesting the changes now, before the charter is approved. ....Roy
Received on Wednesday, 17 October 2007 18:32:19 UTC