Well, the why is simple enough. The draft had expired quite some time ago but the idea of standardized autodiscovery was always on the table. I simply revived the draft to give the WG a chance to decide if they wanted to move it forward. Regardless of any specific issues that may exist with the draft itself, there was zero interest demonstrated. So, now it really is dead.
- James Franklin Tse wrote: > I think this mail explained why: > http://www.imc.org/atom-syntax/mail-archive/msg19202.html > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Bob Wyman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "James M Snell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: "atom-syntax" <[email protected]> > Sent: Monday, 28 May, 2007 11:05 > Subject: Re: Atom Feed Autodiscovery > >> Autodiscovery is a broadly used and useful convention. It is unfortunate and >> unhelpful if this is not formally defined somewhere. >> >> bob wyman >> >> On 5/25/07, James M Snell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> >>> General FYI... the Atom Feed Autodiscovery draft [1] expires tomorrow. >>> There has been zero interest in moving this forward so I'm just going to >>> let it die. >>> >>> - James >>> >>> [1] >>> >>> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-snell-atompub-autodiscovery-00.txt >>> >>> > >
