Re: Report on testing of the link relations registry

On Wed, 18 Aug 2010, Silvia Pfeiffer wrote:
> Since both, the WHATWG and the Microformats are more "living" lists, 
> i.e. take on experimental work as well as an interim list, could they be 
> used as contributors to the IANA list, where only the well-accepted ones 
> get listed? If so, maybe a simpler process for moving something from the 
> Microformats/WHATWG list into the IANA list could be determined?
> It actually seems to me that the W3C is standing in the middle of three 
> other organisations that are trying to claim authoritative registry 
> status for different reasons and we are only moderating because we have 
> a big stake in the use of the names. Are we even in a position to 
> resolve this or is this just a random discussion?

For the record, I don't think anyone is saying that the WHATWG wiki should 
be the normative place of record for link relations. If another solution 
is available, that would be great. As I noted in an earlier e-mail, the 
WHATWG wiki is in fact not currently actively maintained (only basic 
spam-fighting is going on currently), because there's a hope that we can 
find a better solution.

In particular, if the Microformats community are happy to have that 
responsibility, I don't think anyone would object on the grounds that the 
WHATWG wiki is a better solution, so long as certain basic needs are met 
(such as not being pragmatic about documenting values that see real use 
regardless of their specification status, and such as exposing the 
conformance information that HTML needs).

I similarly get the impression that the Microformats community is also not 
"trying to claim authoritative registry status" -- Tantek's message 
basically described it as a pragmatic registry that was born from a desire 
to document existing practice, not to have any sort of normative status.

I don't think whether an organisation is trying to claim authoritative 
registry status should factor into our decision of whether to consider 
them authoritative for the purpose of the spec.

Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'

Received on Tuesday, 17 August 2010 22:34:33 UTC