W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > uri@w3.org > February 2005

Re: FW: Last Call: 'Domain Name System Uniform Resource Identifiers' to Proposed Standard

From: Martin Duerst <duerst@w3.org>
Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2005 10:56:28 +0900
Message-Id: <6.0.0.20.2.20050219104835.07c0b5a0@localhost>
To: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>, Larry Masinter <LMM@acm.org>
Cc: uri@w3.org, uri-review@ietf.org

As noted by Dan, the uri-review@ietf.org mailing list has never
taken off. All the real discussions have been taking place on
this list. There was discussion on closing uri-review@w3.org,
my guess is that the only reason that discussion wasn't conclusive
was that a lot of peolpe who care about URIs and URI schemes
were just not on that list.

So I suggest to use uri@w3.org as the list for URI scheme reviews;
the chance that a new URI scheme gets some good comments is much
higher on this list than on uri-review@ietf.org.

Regards,    Martin.

P.S.: While uri@w3.org recently has been 'upgraded' to be the
       W3C URI IG, it continues to serve as the mailing list for
       the former IETF URL WG (just hosted by W3C).

At 03:53 05/02/19, Dan Connolly wrote:
 >
 >On Fri, 2005-02-18 at 09:56 -0800, Larry Masinter wrote:
 >> Should the process document request that the "last call"
 >> announcement for documents defining permanent URIs be sent to
 >> the URI review list?
 >
 >Yes, I suppose so.
 >
 >Which is the URI review list?
 >
 >At some point, I made a link to
 >
 >https://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/working-groups/uri-review/current/maillist.html
 >
 >but that has since gone 404.
 >
 >google finds
 >  https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/uri-review
 >
 >hmm... lots of spam... hmm... discussion of closing it
 > http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/uri-review/current/msg00298.html
 >
 >
 >Is this discussed in draft-hansen? Ah, yes...
 >
 >
 >   3.  If desired, send a copy of the template or a pointer to the
 >       Internet Draft (and containing section number) to the mailing
 >       list uri-review@ietf.org; participate in the discussion and
 >       review of the URI scheme; allow a reasonable period (at least 2
 >       weeks) for discussion and comments.
 >
 >  http://ietfreport.isoc.org/idref/draft-hansen-2717bis-2718bis-uri-guidelines/
 >
 >
 >So I guess that's where we are. OK.
 >
 >Please let's add the address of the HTTP archive of uri-review@ietf.org
 >to draft-hansen, i.e. a commitment from the IETF to hold this part
 >of the web site still, or at least leave redirection cookie-crumbs
 >when it moves.
 >
 >--
 >Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
 >D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541  0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E 
Received on Saturday, 19 February 2005 03:03:11 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:25:09 UTC