Atom Version -09 Sent for Final Review

Atom Specification Sent to IESG for Final Review

Date:      Thu, 9 Jun 2005 07:34:55 -0700
From:      Paul Hoffman <phoffman@imc.org>
To:        Scott Hollenbeck <shollenbeck@verisign.com>
Cc:        Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>,
           Atom WG <atom-syntax@imc.org>
Subject:   draft-ietf-atompub-format-09.txt is ready for IESG review

Greetings again. As the shepherd for this document, I would like to ask you to bring it to the IESG for final review. The WG has worked hard on this document after IETF Last Call, and made many changes that incorporate the WG rough consensus on issues that were brought up during and after IETF Last Call.

Some members of the Working Group remain unenthusiastic about some sections of the document, but we strongly believe that there is rough (or better) consensus in support of the document as a whole. For some of the parts with the most contention, there cannot be more than very rough consensus due to basic differences in the way people would design parts of the format, particularly given that we have many models in existence with the different flavors of RSS. For some parts of the document, there is contention about whether or not a particular item should or should not be in the Atom core versus being an extension. For some parts, there is contention whether there should be MUST/SHOULD/MAY leeway for content creators in the presence or absence of an element, or the semantic content of an element; we really pushed RFC 2119 around during the past few months.

The length of the mailing list archive is anomalous in the IETF, but so is the large number of regular active contributors and the breadth of parts of the document to which they contributed. This huge amount of input has caused the document to be more seriously reviewed, by more eyes, than a typical IETF document, but it has also caused more opportunity for disagreement along the way. Yet we still ended up with a format that meets the goals of the charter and the general agreement of most of the participants in the Working Group.

Please let us know how if the IESG has any concerns with the document during their review.

--Paul Hoffman, Director
--Internet Mail Consortium

[Note: Paul Hoffman and Tim Bray are Co-Chairs of the IETF Atom Publishing Format and Protocol (atompub) Working Group.]

[Source: http://www.imc.org/atom-syntax/mail-archive/msg15913.html]

Date:     Thu, 9 Jun 2005 10:39:43 -0400
From:     Scott Hollenbeck <sah@428cobrajet.net>
To:       'Paul Hoffman' <phoffman@imc.org>
Cc:       Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>,
          Atom WG <atom-syntax@imc.org>
Subject:  RE: draft-ietf-atompub-format-09.txt is ready for IESG review

I will schedule the document for IESG review during the 23 June [2005] telechat. Thanks for the notes.

Prepared by Robin Cover for The XML Cover Pages archive. General references in "Atom Publishing Format and Protocol."

SEARCH Advanced Search ABOUT Site Map CP RSS Channel Contact Us Sponsoring CP About Our Sponsors NEWS Cover Stories Articles & Papers Press Releases CORE STANDARDS XML SGML Schemas XSL/XSLT/XPath XLink XML Query CSS SVG TECHNOLOGY REPORTS XML Applications General Apps Government Apps Academic Apps EVENTS LIBRARY Introductions FAQs Bibliography Technology and Society Semantics Tech Topics Software Related Standards Historic	Atom Version -09 Sent for Final Review Atom Specification Sent to IESG for Final Review Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2005 07:34:55 -0700 From: Paul Hoffman <phoffman@imc.org> To: Scott Hollenbeck <shollenbeck@verisign.com> Cc: Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>, Atom WG <atom-syntax@imc.org> Subject: draft-ietf-atompub-format-09.txt is ready for IESG review Greetings again. As the shepherd for this document, I would like to ask you to bring it to the IESG for final review. The WG has worked hard on this document after IETF Last Call, and made many changes that incorporate the WG rough consensus on issues that were brought up during and after IETF Last Call. Some members of the Working Group remain unenthusiastic about some sections of the document, but we strongly believe that there is rough (or better) consensus in support of the document as a whole. For some of the parts with the most contention, there cannot be more than very rough consensus due to basic differences in the way people would design parts of the format, particularly given that we have many models in existence with the different flavors of RSS. For some parts of the document, there is contention about whether or not a particular item should or should not be in the Atom core versus being an extension. For some parts, there is contention whether there should be MUST/SHOULD/MAY leeway for content creators in the presence or absence of an element, or the semantic content of an element; we really pushed RFC 2119 around during the past few months. The length of the mailing list archive is anomalous in the IETF, but so is the large number of regular active contributors and the breadth of parts of the document to which they contributed. This huge amount of input has caused the document to be more seriously reviewed, by more eyes, than a typical IETF document, but it has also caused more opportunity for disagreement along the way. Yet we still ended up with a format that meets the goals of the charter and the general agreement of most of the participants in the Working Group. Please let us know how if the IESG has any concerns with the document during their review. --Paul Hoffman, Director --Internet Mail Consortium [Note: Paul Hoffman and Tim Bray are Co-Chairs of the IETF Atom Publishing Format and Protocol (atompub) Working Group.] [Source: http://www.imc.org/atom-syntax/mail-archive/msg15913.html] Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2005 10:39:43 -0400 From: Scott Hollenbeck <sah@428cobrajet.net> To: 'Paul Hoffman' <phoffman@imc.org> Cc: Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>, Atom WG <atom-syntax@imc.org> Subject: RE: draft-ietf-atompub-format-09.txt is ready for IESG review I will schedule the document for IESG review during the 23 June [2005] telechat. Thanks for the notes. Prepared by Robin Cover for The XML Cover Pages archive. General references in "Atom Publishing Format and Protocol."