Re: [apps-discuss] Requirement for "obsoletes" in Abstracts (was: Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-appsawg-media-type-regs-00.txt)

[Barry Leiba <[e-mail]>]

>> A stupid rule in my opinion, but a rule nevertheless. I forgot
>> to add it but will do so in the next revision.
>
> Actually, as co-author, I want to strongly resist this change
> and therefore that putative rule (I claim that, independent of
> its substantive properties, it is invalid; see below).   I have
> three separate reasons, any one of which would, IMO, justify
> saying "no".

Contrary to John's rant (which, dont you know, I was shocked to see,
shocked, I tell you), the IESG does not treat this as a hard-and-fast rule,
but, in fact, more as a "strong recommendation".  ADs normally don't use
DISCUSS to comment on this, but non-blocking COMMENT.  And the PROTO
writeup can call it out and say that it's intended this way.

Either Alexey or I will shepherd this.  I, for one, am happy to call this
out in he writeup.

Barry, as chair