Re: [apps-discuss] FW: New Version Notification for draft-thaler-uri-scheme-reg-ps-00.txt

["Martin J. Dürst" <[e-mail]>]

On 2013/10/16 10:44, "Martin J. Dürst" wrote:

> It should be pointed out that the IRI WG imploded not because of *I*RI
> issues (i.e. not because of internationalization issues) but because of
> strong differences between browser implementers (or those who claimed to
> represent them on the few occasions they showed up in the WG) and others
> more e.g. with an IETF apps background.
>
> The main differences were:
> - Whether to concentrate on how things ought to behave, with occasional
> detours into aberrations of implementations, or how some actual
> implementations behaved, warts and all
> - Spec style: IETF style (ABNFs plus additional constraints) vs.
> pseudo-code style
> - Whether to create a spec for protocol elements or a spec including
> browser APIs

one more:
- Whether to use 'instant' publishing (each change to the spec, however 
minor, results in a new publication) or 'occasional' publishing (such as 
usual with Internet Drafts and RFCs).

> - What to call the things (URIs/IRIs vs. URLs)
> - Whether there was a need to distinguish 'resource' and 'representation'
> - Whether to have every change go through a WG approval process or
> whether to have a strong editor who would listen to input when appropriate