Re: [apps-discuss] WGLC: draft-ietf-appsawg-about-uri-scheme-03.txt

The I-D points out the impossibility of specifying how to handle the many
different tokens that  a browser may encounte and then goes on to tell us what
Opera does.

I am uncomfortable with a Standards Track document telling us about the
behaviour of one and only one product, with, the text being in the body of the
I-D, an implication that this text has Normative status (earlier versions of
this I-D also included Mozilla Firefox).

Nothing wrong with the web browser mentioned but I think that having just the
one example is inappropriate; other examples should be mentioned (and they all
could be in an Informative appendix).

I note too that this has been 'quiet long-lasting'; an interesting combination.

Tom Petch

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jiankang YAO" <yaojk@cnnic.cn>
To: <apps-discuss@ietf.org>
Cc: <appsawg-chairs@tools.ietf.org>
Sent: Tuesday, March 06, 2012 2:00 AM
Subject: [apps-discuss] WGLC: draft-ietf-appsawg-about-uri-scheme-03.txt

> Dear colleagues,
>
> This message starts a two-week WGLC on the draft
> draft-ietf-appsawg-about-uri-scheme-03.txt.
>
> Please help to review this draft.  If you support publication, please state as
> much on the list.  If you are opposed to publication, please state
> that on the list as well.  It is more/only helpful if you give your reasons
for
> your position as part of your statement.
>
> Pls send your comments to apps-discuss@ietf.org or
appsawg-chairs@tools.ietf.org or editors.
>
> The WGLC will end on March 20, 2012 at 1:00 UTC.
>
>
>
> Best regards,
> Jiankang Yao(as a co-chair of APPSAWG)
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> apps-discuss mailing list
> apps-discuss@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss
>
>