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

Re: Mailing ilst for review (was [Uri-review] Re: FW: Last Call: 'Domain Name System UniformResource ...)

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2005 07:56:31 -0500
Message-Id: <5033e0264bc996c9a18e62b91b6b6ea0@w3.org>
Cc: Larry Masinter <LMM@acm.org>, uri@w3.org, 'Martin Duerst' <duerst@w3.org>, uri-review@ietf.org
To: Leslie Daigle <leslie@thinkingcat.com>

On Mar 3, 2005, at 6:53 PM, Leslie Daigle wrote:
> So, you are proposing (implicitly) that the IETF ask the W3C URI IG to
> carry out a review process for its (the IETF's) registration process.
> And I think that
> 	1/ The W3C URI IG has other interesting things to do!

Well, actually, this IG is chartered to provide exactly this sort of 

"The scope of the URI Interest Group encompasses:

     * review of URI/IRI issues between W3C and the IETF, including 
monitoring maintenance of the IANA URI scheme registry"
  -- http://www.w3.org/2004/07/uri-ig-charter.html#scope

> 	2/ Not every URI registrant should have to expose themselves
> 	   to that wide-ranging disscussion just to get their URI
> 	   scheme through IETF process, and

I guess I can see that point. I'm not sure whether I agree.

> 	3/ The basic mechanics of the mailing lists may differ --
> 	   e.g., in terms of membership management policies, archiving,
> 	   etc.

That one is also covered in the charter too:

"Note: the mailing lists uri@w3.org and public-iri@w3.org follow the 
rules of IETF applicable to mailing list usage (section 8. NOTICES AND 

I don't feel that strongly one way or another which mailing lists are 
as part of the process, but I felt it was important to clarify that the 
_is_ fairly carefully chartered to provide this service, if the IETF 
wants it to.

Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Friday, 4 March 2005 12:56:28 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Sunday, 10 October 2021 22:17:47 UTC