Subject: Atompub WG activity (Last Call: draft-ietf-atompub-protocol to Proposed Standard)

From: Robert Sayre <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2007 03:17:02 -0400

>
> The IESG has received a request from the Atom Publishing Format and 
> Protocol WG (atompub) to consider the following document:
>
> - 'The Atom Publishing Protocol '
>    <draft-ietf-atompub-protocol-14.txt> as a Proposed Standard

By my count, draft-ietf-atompub-protocol-14.txt has generated over 250 
on-topic comments on the WG list since March 06, when the version was 
announced. It is clearly not ready for publication. I don't think it is 
appropriate for the IETF as a whole to review this document.

- Rob

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

---

From: Julian Reschke <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2007 10:34:46 +0100

> appropriate for the IETF as a whole to review this document.

+ 0,5.

The document got lots of constructive feedback in the previous weeks 
(mainly due to fresh eyes), and I think it would be worthwhile to 
resolve most of the issues that were raised before doing the Last Call. 
This will save lots of time spent by new reviewers raising new issues.

Best regards, Julian

---

From: James M Snell <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2007 07:37:10 -0700

While it is definitely true that there has been a lot of good feedback,
it would still be good to at least start broadening the net and get
feedback from the larger IETF community.

- James

Julian Reschke wrote:
> [snip]

---

From: Julian Reschke <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2007 23:05:14 +0100

Julian Reschke schrieb:
>> announced. It is clearly not ready for publication. I don't think it 
>> is appropriate for the IETF as a whole to review this document.
> 
> + 0,5.
> 

I guess I need to rephrase that...

The important thing is that there's quite a number of changes that 
should be applied to draft-ietf-atompub-protocol-14.txt, some editorial, 
some clarifications, and potentially at least one normative change.

We need to make sure that these changes are properly executed, and be 
reviewed before publication. In general, I'm very nervous with changes 
done *after* Last Call, because they frequently are not as well reviewed 
as they should be. If we can make sure that this doesn't happen here, 
it's ok to go on.

That being said, two weeks of LC aren't exactly long, but I trust the 
IESG to do the right thing here :-)

Best regards, Julian

---

From: Robert Sayre <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2007 18:45:22 -0400

Julian Reschke wrote:
> should be applied to draft-ietf-atompub-protocol-14.txt, some 
> editorial, some clarifications, and potentially at least one normative 
> change. 

It may be that the changes don't amount to much, but I'll note that the 
pace on the WG list has remained high. Must be getting near 500 messages 
since last call. Maybe Paul or Tim could give a precise count?

It would also be a good idea to give a disposition on each last call 
comment received.

- Rob

---

From: Julian Reschke <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2007 08:58:12 +0100

Robert Sayre schrieb:
> ...
> ...

This is so true and applies to certain other working groups as well...

Best regards, Julian