Subject: oh no... please... not two lists...?

From: "Weibel,Stu" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 2 Jun 1999 11:35:17 -0400

God help us, but there now seem to be two URI lists.  This seems not only
redundent but potentially destructive.

The W3C seems exactly the right place for these discussions to be carried
forward and archived.  Could we agree to annoint that list as The Place
(tm), or is there actually reason to divide the topic space?

stu

---

From: Patrik Fältström <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 2 Jun 1999 19:48:11 +0200

At 11.35 -0400 1999-06-02, Weibel,Stu wrote:
>forward and archived.

Where the mailing list is run doesn't matter at all for the IESG. So,
it is neither better, nor worse to run it at W3C.

Regarding two lists, you might mix up the URN-discussions list and
the URI discussion list. Both lists were hosted at Bunyip, but thy
are still different. They are both belonging (or was regarding the
URI mailing list) to IETF working groups.

   paf

---

From: Michael Mealling <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 2 Jun 1999 11:45:20 -0400

> redundent but potentially destructive.

Nope. Only one. The URI list at Bunyip is going away due to Bunyip going away.

> (tm), or is there actually reason to divide the topic space?

Just as long as people don't confuse the running of a mailing list with
some transfer of oversight over URIs moving from the IETF to the W3C.
Others might have concerns about URI meta discussions happening in the
closed W3 space, but since this is just an open mailing list that shouldn't
be a concern.

-MM

--
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Mealling        |      Vote Libertarian!       | www.rwhois.net/michael
Sr. Research Engineer   |   www.ga.lp.org/gwinnett     | ICQ#:         14198821
Network Solutions       |          www.lp.org          |  [email-masked]