Re: [apps-discuss] draft-ietf-iri-comparison

Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> Thu, 29 January 2015 05:18 UTC

Return-Path: <mnot@mnot.net>
X-Original-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE1F41A8BBE for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 28 Jan 2015 21:18:35 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.602
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.602 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id NTBCvhX1me1B for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 28 Jan 2015 21:18:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mxout-07.mxes.net (mxout-07.mxes.net [216.86.168.182]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9B8171A1BA7 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Wed, 28 Jan 2015 21:18:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.1.83] (unknown [118.209.44.193]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.mxes.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4C6F422E260; Thu, 29 Jan 2015 00:18:26 -0500 (EST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.1 \(1993\))
From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
In-Reply-To: <CAKHUCzwwF-TrK5jPrrKpJDEJ+p+zf-LknWS7uSYcnrZyiBjTDw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2015 16:18:22 +1100
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <A382ACB4-8AF5-4D6F-9752-86C6BCDF92AE@mnot.net>
References: <54B18B61.8010308@seantek.com> <54B19435.8070401@intertwingly.net> <54B1B211.3050807@seantek.com> <54B1B682.3070609@intertwingly.net> <012001d02d91$6ec42300$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net> <54B2781C.4040505@intertwingly.net> <018e01d02dc6$1d03b0a0$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net> <54B2CC75.5080900@intertwingly.net> <54B79930.3070009@ninebynine.org> <54B7AEC2.9010109@intertwingly.net> <20150116033032.GD2350@localhost> <DM2PR0201MB096082B3915B85F60EDB617DC34F0@DM2PR0201MB0960.namprd02.prod.outlook.com> <015c01d0362f$1f6f6020$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net> <BN3PR0201MB0945D77BAC3FFB5396057D7AC3360@BN3PR0201MB0945.namprd02.prod.outlook.com> <54C65580.2080407@ninebynine.org> <E0FF89B4-6AD0-4F7C-AF41-C60DF30555E1@apple.com> <84E353AE-D96B-4211-99CB-D08AE17B1B1E@gbiv.com> <D186B223-DF46-4996-98A6-D258503F0068@mnot.net> <CAKHUCzwwF-TrK5jPrrKpJDEJ+p+zf-LknWS7uSYcnrZyiBjTDw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Dave Cridland <dave@cridland.net>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1993)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/apps-discuss/-kIatmbd1j61399XiTJTH8ry-Mk>
Cc: Roy Fielding <fielding@gbiv.com>, Graham Klyne <gk@ninebynine.org>, IETF Apps Discuss <apps-discuss@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] draft-ietf-iri-comparison
X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols <apps-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-discuss/>
List-Post: <mailto:apps-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2015 05:18:36 -0000

> On 28 Jan 2015, at 7:20 pm, Dave Cridland <dave@cridland.net> wrote:
> 
> Going all meta for a moment...
> 
> On 27 Jan 2015 23:01, "Mark Nottingham" <mnot@mnot.net> wrote:
> > I'd far prefer that appsawg were shut down and replaced by "mail" and "Web" WGs, the latter taking responsibility for URIs. They'd fight over format stuff, but that mirrors real life...
> 
> Some of the most interesting discussions have arisen because the audience here is broad enough to observe the uses of URIs outside the traditional web space (ie, HTML). At the risk of sounding a little high and mighty, the web world has a lot to learn from the more conservative mail world about stability and compatibility - and the reverse is undoubtedly true as well.
> 
> Still, things like DMARC show that the mail world can be screwed over by a few big players just as badly. Luckily those players have self censored themselves from discussions...
> 
> In any case, unless this list were shockingly busy

I think we get into that state pretty often on this list... YMMV.

> , I'd rather not hive off discussions into groupthink collectives. Dissension is a fine product of diversity.

--
Mark Nottingham   https://www.mnot.net/