On 2012-01-01, at 15:51 +0100, Bjoern Hoehrmann wrote: > * Thomas Roessler wrote: >> thank you for working on this draft. Before you try to get a >> specification through Last Call that's possibly at odds with the current >> (and as far as I know original) use of the link relationship, it would >> perhaps be useful to talk to the current users of this particular link >> relationship, and request their review of the specification, and find >> out their views on the proposed change to its semantics. >> >> A good place to reach many of the interested parties would be the >> [email protected] mailing list. >> >> Also, I'd recommend that you contact Ian Jacobs, W3C's head of >> communications; he's in charge of the detailed publication requirements >> for W3C specifications. >> >> Before these steps have happened, it would appear premature to me to >> request publication of this document as an RFC. > > If Ian Jacobs is responsible for the things discussed on spec-prod, I'd think > he reads that mailing list, and the mailing list has been aware of the draft > since the first version has been published in October 2011, > <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/spec-prod/2011OctDec/0008.html>.
Neither the intention to last call the draft, nor the proposed incompatible change were announced to that list. _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
