Re: ISSUE-27 survey feedback, was: Responses to objections to the Microformats rel registry CP

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 

Best regards, Julian

Received on Thursday, 7 April 2011 10:19:31 UTC