W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > January 2004

Re: ACTION 20040116#mime ... publishing the mimetypes doc

From: Graham Klyne <gk@ninebynine.org>
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2004 20:53:58 +0000
Message-Id: <>
To: Aaron Swartz <me@aaronsw.com>
Cc: rdf core <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>

At 14:17 26/01/04 -0600, Aaron Swartz wrote:
>>I'm waiting for Aaron to reissue the draft with revised dates for the RDF 
>>documents, reflecting the PR publication date (as noted by Dave), at 
>>which point I'd seek the WG's agreement to request publication.
>Sorry I missed the telecon, but since the specs will presumably be 
>published as Recommendations sometime soon now that the review period is 
>over, wouldn't it make more sense to wait until then so that the mime type 
>document has the final final dates when submitted?

I'll answer in two parts...

(1) I was pursuing what I understood the agreed goal of aiming for RFC 
publication to closely follow the PR specification.

(2) Should we wait for full recommendation?  Well, maybe.

My personal preference is to go for RFC publication ASAP, so that the gap 
between published MIME type registration and full W3C recommendation is 
minimized (preferably zero).  Among other things, this reduces the amount 
of WG "unfinished business" at the point of achieving REC status.  Also, 
with increasing use of RDF, I think we owe the world a proper MIME type 
registration as soon as possible.  Also, I think that if the specs go to 
REC while the document is in the RFC editor's queue we would find that 
changing the reference dates would be acceptable fix in the final 
publication process.

In summary, I see reasons to move quickly, and no compelling reasons to delay.

That said, if the group decides that it would prefer to delay publication 
until the RDF specifications go to REC, I won't put up a vigorous argument.


Graham Klyne
For email:
Received on Monday, 26 January 2004 16:05:09 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:24:27 UTC