W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-urispec@w3.org > October 2014

Re: resolving the URL mess

From: David Sheets <sheets@alum.mit.edu>
Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2014 11:05:06 +0100
Message-ID: <CAAWM5Tz9MmbN233V+yuhNRayLZsPwEZhDpwX0oixQkq=YmK4rA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com>
Cc: "public-urispec@w3.org" <public-urispec@w3.org>, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>, John Klensin <klensin@jck.com>
On Wed, Oct 1, 2014 at 7:29 PM, Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com> wrote:
> I’m not sure what this group is, but the most active players aren’t in it.
> http://www.w3.org/community/urispec/participants

Indeed. We should try to get them on-board at some point when things
spin up properly. I'm a bit crunched for time at the moment having
started this group out of goaded frustration with the current state of
the URL spec.

The next steps, as far as I see them:

1. Agree on some minimal governance
2. Agree on some minimal scope and charter
3. Document the state of the world (started
4. Advertize
5. Show completed subcomponents to stakeholders and ask for feedback

I'd like to see a spec document that actually delivers all of the
features it can and that is significantly more useful, thorough, and
integrable to all concerned.

My personal next TODO items are sending mail regarding steps 1, 2, 3
and getting a very small example of an ideal specification component
ready to demonstrate to people. When 1,2,3 are done, 4 can be
attempted even if the small demo is not ready.

> Anne, Dave Thayer, Sam Ruby, John Klensin come to mind…

I believe that when we have something to show, we should entice them to join us.



> --
> http://larry.masinter.net
Received on Thursday, 2 October 2014 11:01:48 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:45:56 UTC