- From: Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im>
- Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2012 19:04:03 -0600
- To: "Martin J. Dürst" <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
- CC: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>, public-iri@w3.org
Hi Martin, I will create an issue in the tracker for this. On 6/6/12 5:42 PM, "Martin J. Dürst" wrote: > 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 Thursday, 7 June 2012 01:04:31 UTC