- From: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
- Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2011 11:31:29 -0700
- To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Cc: Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>, "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>, www-archive <www-archive@w3.org>
Julian, are you commenting in an official IANA capacity here? If so, I'd like to cite this email as evidence that IANA has no intention of changing. / Jonas On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 3:37 AM, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote: > On 17.03.2011 17:36, Paul Cotton wrote: >> >> ... > > In <http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/40318/issue-27-objection-poll/results>, > Jonas writes: > >> IANA does not have a good track record of operating registries that affect >> formats higher up in the protocol stack. For example the HTTP header >> registry is notoriously out of date and so far IANA seems to have made no >> effort to fix this. Instead blame is being pushed around and no change >> occurs. For example, IANA appears to be completely unwilling to go out and >> look at what is out there and add it to the registry, and instead insist >> that other people add things to the appropriate registry, leading to absurd >> situations where headers are known by everyone except the actual registry. > > This is a (common) misunderstanding. > > The IANA function is *purely* administrative. > > What get's into the registry and how it gets there only depends on the > specification that defines the registry, and the rules it sets up. > > It is *not* IANA's role to go out and add entries just because somebody uses > them. Consider them as a web site, nothing more, if this helps. > > Most IANA registries depend on *people* submitting registry entries to a > review mailing list. That is, either those who mint the new values, or > others who try to clean up behind them. > > Looking at HTTP header fields... the registration process is defined in > <http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3864#section-4>. There's both a permanent and > a provisional registry, where the latter only requires a citeable spec, > registration template, and an email to the review mailing list (specified in > RFC 3864). > > >> To make this worse, despite claims to the contrary, IANAs registration >> process is so heavy weight that many people give up. See the experiences >> documented here for an example: >> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Aug/0161.html > > But make sure you read the subsequent thread, plus consider the current > registry's contents (hint: all HTML5 link relations without open bugs in > *this* WG should be in the registry, and have been for quite some time). > >> While IANA has claimed that changes can be made to improve the situation, >> so far it doesn't appear that these changes have been made giving me little >> reason to believe that they will in the future. And no reason to believe >> that they'll be made in a satisfactory way. > > I think you're mixing up IANA with various people active in the IETF. Do > not. And also keep in mind that IANA runs many registries, with different > requirements, and different levels of transparency and responsiveness. > > If you want to argue against the IANA Link Relations registry, please use > *that* one as example. > > Furthermore, going back to message headers: if you are unhappy about > unregistered values in wide use then please consider writing up a small > specification and submit it for provisional registration. I'll be happy to > help, and suspect the Mozilla Wiki might already contain relevant > information. > >> If IANA want to be responsible for running the rel registry I think they >> need to prove themselves first. Let them show that they are running a rel >> registry which is up to date. Either by asking people who register in >> whatever official registry we come up with to also register with IANA (that >> should give them incentive to keep the bar for registering low), or by >> manually adding the entries themselves. Something that they undoubtedly will >> need to do even if they were the official registry as no matter how low we >> make the bar, some people won't know or care enough to register. > > See above. IANA does none of this. People need to. > > Best regards, Julian > > PS: chairs, please consider this feedback when deciding on ISSUE-27. >
Received on Tuesday, 22 March 2011 18:33:47 UTC