- From: Leslie Daigle <leslie@thinkingcat.com>
- Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2005 17:00:39 -0400
- To: Larry Masinter <LMM@acm.org>
- CC: "'Iesg (E-mail)'" <iesg@ietf.org>, tony+urireg@maillennium.att.com, uri@w3.org
Larry, My point is not whether the mailing list discussion is optional or not -- it's about setting expectations for the outcome of that discussion. "Review" against what? Review against generally held technical opinion about URIs, or review against the registration process in your BCP. Leslie. Larry Masinter wrote: > Hi Leslie, > > I thought we had responded already, but just in case, please > note that the formal process for registration is "expert review", > not "mailing list review". > > >>Mailing list review is RECOMMENDED prior to registration, but may also be >>required by the 'Designated Expert' during the 'Expert Review' >>period. > > > The document explicitly states that the mailing list review is > not formally required. I expect the designated expert to ask for > expert review wherever it seems appropriate, e.g., a URI for > a standards-track protocol should also be reviewed by the appropriate > mailing list(s) for that protocol. > > I suppose we could make it even clearer, but I'd really like > to encourage mailing list review even if it isn't formally required. > > Larry >
Received on Thursday, 21 July 2005 21:05:10 UTC