Re: [apps-discuss] request to register 'describes' link relation (http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-wilde-describes-link-01)

6.  "type"

   The "type" Link relation can be used to indicate that the context
   resource is an instance of the resource identified by the target IRI.

     HTTP/1.1 200 OK
     Content-Type: text/plain
     Link: <http://example.org/Person/givenName>; type="type"

     Sally

Surely you mean "rel="type" .

Peter Rushforth

________________________________
From: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of James M Snell
Sent: October 9, 2012 20:10
To: Barry Leiba
Cc: apps-discuss@ietf.org; link-relations@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] request to register 'describes' link relation (http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-wilde-describes-link-01)

Sticking my hand up and hoping to get some similar treatment for:

  http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-snell-additional-link-relations-05.txt

This one has been there for a while. I followed the same advice you just gave dret and changed it to informational and cleaned up the normative references. Pretty basic draft.

- James

On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 4:40 PM, Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org<mailto:barryleiba@computer.org>> wrote:
[I'm removing the non-IETF groups from the distribution list.]

> this is a request to register 'describes' in the IANA link relations
> registry established by RFC 5988. the latest draft of the registration
> document is available at
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-wilde-describes-link-01, and the last
> version announced on a variety of mailing lists has not generated any
> feedback asking for changes.

I'll let the folks on the link-relations list respond to the
suitability of the specification for documenting a useful link
relation.  I have just a couple of process points:

1. In order for the registration to be done, this document will have
to be published somewhere that will satisfy the Designated Expert as
being a stable reference.  That probably means that you'll want this
to be an RFC, so you need to be sorting out how that will happen.
Happily, I'm willing to sponsor this as an AD-sponsored individual
submission, if the link-relations folks agree that we should register
this.

2. I don't think this should be Standards Track, though (and it
doesn't need to be in order to register the link relation and to be
the reference documentation for it).  I would prefer that you make it
Informational, change the "SHOULD" to "should" in the Security
Considerations, and remove Section 2 and the normative reference to
RFC 2119.  (This can wait until after the feedback from the
link-relations mailing list.)

Barry, Applications AD
_______________________________________________
apps-discuss mailing list
apps-discuss@ietf.org<mailto:apps-discuss@ietf.org>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss