- From: Martin J. Dürst <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
- Date: Thu, 07 Jun 2012 08:42:16 +0900
- To: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
- CC: Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im>, public-iri@w3.org
I agree with making mailing list review required. Regards, Martin. P.S.: Peter, does this have an issue number? If not, can you create an issue, please? On 2012/06/07 6:54, Bjoern Hoehrmann wrote: > * Peter Saint-Andre wrote: >> <hat type='individual'/> >> >> Section 6.1 of 4395bis states: >> >> The registration process is an optional mailing list >> review, followed by "Expert Review". >> >> Yet Section 6.2 states: >> >> Someone wishing to register a new URI/IRI scheme MUST [...] >> >> 3. Send a copy of the template or a pointer to the containing >> document (with specific reference to the section with the >> template) to the mailing list uri-review@ietf.org, requesting >> review. >> >> Is the mailing list review optional or mandatory? > > RFC 4395 had it somewhere inbetween, with the equivalent of 6.2 saying > the above is a SHOULD and I note that the "optional" is lowercase, which > I would have taken to mean expert reviewers would insist on mailing list > reviews for "important" and "possibly controversial" proposals, but in > some cases they might feel it's not really necessary, so given that the > SHOULD has already been turned into a MUST, I would think this is no > longer optional. Section 8 would also have to be fixed if the Working > Group agrees to require mailing list review.
Received on Wednesday, 6 June 2012 23:42:53 UTC