Subject: [apps-discuss] 'about' URI scheme draft

From: Mykyta Yevstifeyev <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 4 May 2012 08:40:05 +0200

Hi,

This is to let you know that I'm going to be offline for some 1.5 week
or more, so I won't be able to paritipate is discussing the 'about'
URI scheme draft, whose editor I am, and which has just ended IETF LC.
Though I might be able to read some messages, I won't be able to
respond.  So I'd like to ask you not to take any action with respect
to this document until all LC comments are resolved via my responding
to those messages and posting a new version (and I guess we'll need a
2nd LC as there were many comments on this document's intended status,
I mean changing it to Infrormational).

Sincerely,
Mykyta Yevstifeyev

---

From: Barry Leiba <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 4 May 2012 02:59:49 -0400

> So I'd like to ask you not to take any action with respect
> to those messages and posting a new version

I tentatively have it scheduled for the telechat on 24 May.  If we can't
resolve everything and post a new version by 18 May, I'll move it out to
the next telechat after.

> (and I guess we'll need a
> 2nd LC as there were many comments on this document's intended
> status, I mean changing it to Infrormational).

No, we don't need a new last call for that reason.  If we last-call a doc
as Informational, and then want to move it to Standards Track, we need a
second last call.  We don't need to do that if we *downgrade* the intended
status.  That's exactly why I last-called it at Proposed Standard.

Now, depending upon the evaluation of the chairs and the AD as to the
result of last call and the extent of the changes, we might do a second
last call.  But that wouldn't be for the status change.

Barry, responsible AD