- From: Martin Duerst <duerst@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2004 17:50:46 -0500
- To: public-webarch-comments@w3.org, www-tag@w3.org
- Cc: w3c-i18n-ig@w3.org, "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@apache.org>, "Larry Masinter" <masinter@adobe.com>, timbl@w3.org, Michel Suignard <michelsu@microsoft.com>
This is both a last call comment on the Architecture Document as well as a general comment to the TAG, and serves to discard an action item from the I18N WG (core TF). Background: The Architecture Document has a dependency on RFC2396bis. The Character Model has a dependency on the IRI spec, which has a dependency on RFC2396bis (because early last year, the syntax in the IRI spec was adapted to RFC2396bis). Moving RFC2396bis forward therefore seems crucial for the advancement of various related specs. The reference in the Architecture Document for RFC2396bis is to Internet Draft draft-fielding-uri-rfc2396bis-03, which is no longer active, see: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-fielding-uri-rfc2396bis-03.txt Trying a newer version, at http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-fielding-uri-rfc2396bis-04.txt, gives an even more explicit message: >>>>>>>> This Internet-Draft has been deleted. Unrevised documents placed in the Internet-Drafts directories have a maximum life of six months. After that time, they are deleted. This Internet-Draft was not published as an RFC. The name of the internet-draft was draft-fielding-uri-rfc2396bis-03.txt Internet-Drafts are not an archival document series, and expired drafts, such as this one, are not available; please do not ask for copies... they are not available. The Secretariat does not have information as to future plans of the authors or working groups WRT the deleted Internet-Draft. For more information or a copy of the document, contact the author directly. Draft Author(s): Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@w3.org> >>>>>>>> rfc2396bis seems to be crucial for the Architecture Document, indeed the 'Status of this Document' section says: >>>>>>>> This document uses the concepts and terms regarding URIs as defined in draft-fielding-uri-rfc2396bis-03, preferring them to those defined in RFC 2396. The IETF Internet Draft draft-fielding-uri-rfc2396bis-03 is expected to obsolete RFC 2396, which is the current URI standard. The TAG is tracking the evolution of draft-fielding-uri-rfc2396bis-03. >>>>>>>> Last call comments: - The sections of the Architecture Document about URIs are difficult to review without an active Internet-Draft of RFC2396bis. The Architecture Document should have refered, and future versions should refer, to a version of this draft in an official Internet Drafts repository (with explanations of how to find the next version in case the expiry date of the current version is before the end of last call). [It is also possible to write to the Internet-Drafts Secretariat and request an extension for an Internet-Draft.] - The Architecture Document should not advance (e.g. to CR) without corresponding advancement of RFC2396bis (e.g. to IETF last call or beyond). Comment directly to the TAG: Given the importance of RFC2396bis, we want to strongly encourage the TAG and its members not only to track the evolution of draft-fielding-uri-rfc2396bis-03, but to do everything possible and necessary for a quick advancement of this document. If there is anything we can help, please tell us. [In the intent of moving this document forward, and encouraged by the lead editor, I have extensively commented on draft-fielding-uri-rfc2396bis-03 starting at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/uri/2003Jun/0045.html and would be glad to help sorting out and where appropriate implementing these comments.] For the IRI draft (and therefore the Character Model), the alternative would be to change the syntax back to RFC 2396. But this is not desirable. Regards, Martin.
Received on Wednesday, 4 February 2004 18:09:45 UTC