Re: [urn] I-D Action: draft-ietf-urnbis-rfc2141bis-urn-03

[SM <[e-mail]>]

Hi Alfred,
At 11:47 16-10-2012, Alfred wrote:
>Speaking as the draft editor:
>
>This draft version incorporates the changes proposed on my
>"A way forward ..." proposal posted to this list on  5 July and
>archived at
>   http://www.IETF.ORG/mail-archive/web/urn/current/msg01776.html,
>taking into account the feedback received for this (in so far as
>it related directly to this draft), and it contains many additional
>changes based on an evaluation of all on-list and off-list comments
>received since the publication of the -02 version.

I'll be candid.  I took a quick look at the draft.  About a third of 
the text in draft-ietf-urnbis-rfc2141bis-urn-03 is non-technical 
material.  When I compare this draft with the one submitted by Peter 
Saint-Andre, I am inclined to pick the latter.

I am ok if you take off-list comments.  I think that it is better to 
discuss about changes on-list.  BTW, you get a +2 for the extensive 
notes in the Changes section.  You are going for a Working Group Last 
Call during the Turkey Day/Shopping season.  It's not the best time 
in my humble opinion.  I understand that I am skidding on process ice 
by saying this.  May I humbly suggest that you discuss the matter of 
the drafts with Peter?  Broad agreement would be my preference.

Regards,
-sm