Re: [urn] URNbis document status

[Peter Saint-Andre <[e-mail]>]

On 8/25/14, 6:22 PM, John C Klensin wrote:
> Hi.
>
> This is mostly to Andy and Peter, but the WG should be aware
> that it has been sent.
>
>>From the tracker and some additional information, we now have,
> in no particular order:
>
> (1) draft-ietf-urnbis-semantics-clarif-00, described in a note I
> just sent:
> 	   Awaiting posting approval from Andy.  That approval
> 	should also tell the Secretariat to make it as replacing
> 	draft-ietf-urnbis-urns-are-not-uris (and the latter as
> 	being replaced).
>
> (2) draft-ietf-urnbis-ns-reg-transition-03:
> 	   Just posted with fairly minor changes.  While those
> 	changes are, I hope, improvements, the main reason from
> 	posting -03 was to prevent the draft from expiring this
> 	week.  Once we reach consensus on it (assuming we
> 	eventually do), it should be identified as having
> 	superceded draft-ietf-urnbis-rfc3044bis-issn-urn and
> 	draft-ietf-urnbis-rfc3187bis-isbn-urn).
>
> (3) Definitions and syntax - 2141bis
> (draft-ietf-urnbis-rfc2141bis-urn-07):
>     Expired
>
> (4) Namespace definition mechanisms - 3406bis
> (draft-ietf-urnbis-rfc3406bis-urn-ns-reg-09):
>     Expired.
>
> (5) NBNs (draft-ietf-urnbis-rfc3188bis-nbn-urn-04):
> 	 Expired spring of 2013 (we all know why, but shouldn't
> 	lose track of this as a work item).
>
> The last three are charter-identified documents, the other two
> are mostly just procedural.  I hope we can see active versions
> of at least (3) and (4) Real Soon Now, if only because it is a
> little hard to work this way.

Agreed.

Unfortunately since a job change in January my time for IETF work has 
been quite limited, and I have ~15 I-Ds to finish up. My first priority 
consists of the various PRECIS WG items, which I'll be working on this 
week. I will set aside some time next week for URNBIS WG items.

My apologies for any delays I have caused.

Peter