Re: Comments on draft-fielding-uri-rfc2396bis-07

On Nov 5, 2004, at 12:14 PM, Bruce Lilly wrote:
> Evidently the text isn't as clear and unambiguous as you apparently
> believe it to be.  One also might wonder what is the point in recent
> (late September of this year) publication of a draft as "a work in
> progress" and soliciting comments, if comments are to be dismissed
> out of hand.

They weren't dismissed out of hand -- they were considered and rejected
because they are unsupported by the text that appears in the 
That has no bearing on the status of the mailto specification.

If you had been reading the uri mailing list, you would know that
draft 07 was created to resolve the editorial issues identified in
the IESG last call of draft 06 so that the IESG would have a clean
document to review on October 13 and subsequently approve for
publication as a Full Standard on October 18.  Note that all of
those dates are in the past -- the document is already in the
RFC editor's queue as of 2004/10/19.

Likewise, you should know that all standards-track specifications
must be revised, obsoleted, or moved to historical within a reasonable
time after their dependencies have progressed on the standards-track.
The mailto specification will be revised, with or without the original
authors, and you should address your comments to that effort when
it takes place.


Received on Friday, 5 November 2004 21:10:41 UTC