Re: [apps-discuss] URI registry

Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melnikov@isode.com> Thu, 10 February 2011 09:54 UTC

Return-Path: <alexey.melnikov@isode.com>
X-Original-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8DF373A68D9 for <apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 10 Feb 2011 01:54:24 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -100.847
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-100.847 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.603, BAYES_00=-2.599, FRT_ADOBE2=2.455, J_CHICKENPOX_15=0.6, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id O+xZxq1ETpBm for <apps-discuss@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 10 Feb 2011 01:54:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rufus.isode.com (rufus.isode.com [62.3.217.251]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3ABBB3A6929 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Thu, 10 Feb 2011 01:54:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [92.40.141.167] (92.40.141.167.sub.mbb.three.co.uk [92.40.141.167]) by rufus.isode.com (submission channel) via TCP with ESMTPA id <TVO11wADL1UK@rufus.isode.com>; Thu, 10 Feb 2011 09:54:33 +0000
Message-ID: <4D53B5BB.80206@isode.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2011 09:54:03 +0000
From: Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melnikov@isode.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.12) Gecko/20050915
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=22Martin_J=2E_D=FCrst=22?= <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
References: %3C4D26B005.2060909@gmail.com%3E <4D2C7755.5080908@gmail.com> <81F42F63D5BB344ABF294F8E80990C7902782BBA@MTV-EXCHANGE.microfocus.com> <4D455380.6040103@gmail.com> <3792F8F3-D01B-4B05-9E73-59228F09FE5C@gbiv.com> <4D464EA4.7090303@gmail.com> <7ED44745-7DBA-4372-BE39-22061DC26DF2@gbiv.com> <4D46CE52.6030503@vpnc.org> <4D47DD4A.7040503@gmail.com> <06BA884E-D1C7-4783-BBE6-A6B21DE013B7@niven-jenkins.co.uk> <4D482071.8050202@gmail.com> <CDAB7832-EBF9-4ECE-B8D1-09BA39BDF4B8@niven-jenkins.co.uk> <4D48267A.1030800@gmail.com> <96CC61EE-81BD-43CB-A83F-78E67B2DA7A5@niven-jenkins.co.uk> <C68CB012D9182D408CED7B884F441D4D058EEE61B9@nambxv01a.corp.adobe.com> <026901cbc781$a2724ee0$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net> <4D520AE6.8070502@it.aoyama.ac.jp> <000901cbc867$7a9d31a0$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net> <4D537E48.9030403@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
In-Reply-To: <4D537E48.9030403@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: public-iri@w3.org, apps-discuss@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] URI registry
X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols <apps-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/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, 10 Feb 2011 09:54:24 -0000

Martin J. Dürst wrote:

> [Responding one more time here because this is a metadiscussion; 
> please move the discussion to public-iri@w3.org (the mailing list of 
> the IETF IRI WG). Please also see 
> http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/iri/trac/ticket/54 and 
> http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/iri/trac/ticket/55 for the two issues 
> this has resulted in]
>
> On 2011/02/10 6:38, t.petch wrote:
>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Martin J. Dürst"<duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
>> To: "t.petch"<ietfc@btconnect.com>
>> Cc: "Larry Masinter"<masinter@adobe.com>obe.com>; "Ben Niven-Jenkins"
>> <ben@niven-jenkins.co.uk>;<apps-discuss@ietf.org>;<public-iri@w3.org>
>> Sent: Wednesday, February 09, 2011 4:32 AM
>
 [...]

>> I would expect the WG chairs
>> and AD to declare such activity ultra vires (but I might get
>> a pleasant surprise:-).
>
> I'd definitely like to hear from the WG chairs or the AD(s), but maybe 
> first we have to have some discussion in the WG to see where we are 
> headed, and to what extent we might potentially jump out of our 
> charter fence.

I think this is sensible. And if the WG comes to rough consensus that 
some procedure changes are needed, I am sure that one of your friendly 
ADs will be willing to help you out with rechartering, etc.

And of course it is up to the IRI WG chairs to decide if this discussion 
is appropriate for the IRI WG mailing list.