Re: [apps-discuss] [link-relations] Fwd: I-D Action: draft-ohye-canonical-link-relation-00.txt

Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im> Thu, 01 December 2011 19:07 UTC

Return-Path: <stpeter@stpeter.im>
X-Original-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 376701F0CB4 for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 1 Dec 2011 11:07:46 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id H4meHL4Uv-5M for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 1 Dec 2011 11:07:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: from stpeter.im (mailhost.stpeter.im [207.210.219.225]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1908F1F0CB0 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Thu, 1 Dec 2011 11:07:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: from normz.cisco.com (unknown [72.163.0.129]) (Authenticated sender: stpeter) by stpeter.im (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9F0354214C; Thu, 1 Dec 2011 12:14:44 -0700 (MST)
Message-ID: <4ED7D07E.60807@stpeter.im>
Date: Thu, 01 Dec 2011 12:07:42 -0700
From: Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.5; rv:8.0) Gecko/20111105 Thunderbird/8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
References: <4E083D3F.6030200@gmx.de> <4E0D3EA5.7010803@gmail.com> <4E0DCFEF.20206@gmx.de> <4E0DEA77.3050007@gmail.com> <4E0E0E76.2080007@gmail.com> <4E0E995A.7060800@gmail.com> <4E0F1058.3050201@gmail.com> <1309613470.2807.17.camel@mackerel> <4E0F1F2F.8020504@gmail.com> <CAGKau1GyaxpgZsZmUcqZp1iUG6wrvSG3LHM3Pq52AjXfZz900Q@mail.gmail.com> <4E0FF142.1010201@gmail.com> <4ED7C27A.2030702@stpeter.im> <4ED7CD0D.5080003@gmx.de> <4ED7CD9F.9020602@stpeter.im> <4ED7D02A.50305@gmx.de>
In-Reply-To: <4ED7D02A.50305@gmx.de>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.3.3
OpenPGP: url=https://stpeter.im/stpeter.asc
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Cc: IETF Apps Discuss <apps-discuss@ietf.org>, Joachim Kupke <joachim@kupke.za.net>, Maile Ohye <maileko@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] [link-relations] Fwd: I-D Action: draft-ohye-canonical-link-relation-00.txt
X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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, 01 Dec 2011 19:07:46 -0000

On 12/1/11 12:06 PM, Julian Reschke wrote:
> On 2011-12-01 19:55, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
>> On 12/1/11 11:53 AM, Julian Reschke wrote:
>>> On 2011-12-01 19:07, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
>>>> I'm creating the IESG ballot text right now and I have one question...
>>>>
>>>> On 7/2/11 10:34 PM, Mykyta Yevstifeyev wrote:
>>>> ...
>>>>>> I18N for this link relation; so I believe the text should just state
>>>>>> that there's nothing to say in addition to RFC 5988, Section 8."
>>>>>> --response by M. Yevstifeyev: "Probably such approach is OK."
>>>>>> --response by M. Ohye, “Julian, would you like us to restate the
>>>>>> current text to explicitly mention there is nothing beyond RFC 5988,
>>>>>> or leave as-is?”
>>>>> So let's wait for Julian's response.
>>>>
>>>> As far as I can see, Julian never replied on the i18n topic. Did I miss
>>>> his post to the list?
>>>
>>> No, I probably never replied.
>>>
>>> I don't think it matters. We can leave things as they are, or add
>>> another statement pointing to RFC 5988's I18N section.
>>>
>>> Best regards, Julian
>>
>> Yeah, I would suggest:
>>
>> OLD
>>     In designating a canonical URI, please see [RFC3986] for information
>>     on URI encoding.
>>
>> NEW
>>     Internationalization considerations for link relations are provided
>>     in Section 8 of [RFC5988].
> 
> Works for me.

I'll add that as an RFC Editor note so we can move forward.

Thanks!

Peter

-- 
Peter Saint-Andre
https://stpeter.im/