- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2011 12:18:57 +0200
- To: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
- CC: HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
On 07.04.2011 11:26, Henri Sivonen wrote: > On Mon, 2011-04-04 at 22:44 +0200, Julian Reschke wrote: >> On 02.04.2011 03:34, Edward O'Connor wrote: >>> ... >>>> This comparison also doesn't reflect the fact that the IANA registry >>>> has only been open for a couple of months. The expert review process >>>> takes time, and given time the IANA registry is likely to catch up in >>>> reflecting reality, and perhaps overtake the microformats wiki. >>> >>> As we have seen in the past couple of months since your email, the IANA >>> registry hasn't caught up to the existing-rel-values page of the >>> Microformats wiki. For instance, it still doesn't document rel=pingback. >>> ... >> >> Because we haven't got a spec that the designated experts (including >> myself) consider stable enough; note that this affect both content and >> location. > > This is ridiculous. The pingback spec has been stable in terms of both > content and location since 2002. > > I think this should be treated as evidence that the procedures at IANA > (as implemented by the current Designated Experts at least) don't work. Um, sorry. What I *meant* to say is: "note that this affects the location of the spec, not the content". Sorry for the confusion. Of course the contents of the spec has been stable for a long time. The real problem here is that the location of the spec depends on the domain maintained by a single individual; please check the mailing list thread around <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/link-relations/current/msg00054.html>. Best regards, Julian
Received on Thursday, 7 April 2011 10:19:31 UTC