- From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Date: Sat, 18 Apr 2015 10:48:08 -0700
- To: Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>
- Cc: HTTP <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, "Julian F. Reschke" <julian.reschke@greenbytes.de>
Sorry, you're correct. Cheers, > On 18 Apr 2015, at 10:47 am, Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com> wrote: > > Also, I notice the other drafts in there have names of the form draft-ietf-httpbis-* as opposed to the draft-httpbis-* that you suggest. Which is correct? > > On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 at 9:23 PM, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> wrote: > Not hearing any objection (once the scope of 5987bis was clarified), we’ll adopt the following as WG drafts: > > * draft-reschke-rfc5987bis —> draft-httpbis-rfc5987bis > * draft-reschke-http-cice —> draft-httpbis-cice > * draft-tbray-http-legally-restricted-status —> draft-httpbis-legally-restricted-status > > Julian, could you please add your drafts to the http-extensions repo? > > Tim, I’ve added you to the editors team on Github, so you should be able to check in your XML source (or Markdown, if you use it) to: > https://github.com/httpwg/http-extensions > > Feel free to ask me, Julian and Martin for help, especially regarding integration into the Travis build system (which is Martin’s specialty). > > Once we get that sorted out, we can publish -00 drafts. > > Cheers, > > > -- > Mark Nottingham https://www.mnot.net/ > > > > > -- > - Tim Bray (If you’d like to send me a private message, see https://keybase.io/timbray) -- Mark Nottingham https://www.mnot.net/
Received on Saturday, 18 April 2015 17:48:32 UTC