[urn] Re: improved management of registration requests

Thanks, Steffi. If you feel this would help you and other review team 
members, then I see that as an additional benefit.

On 2/5/25 7:20 AM, Nitsche, Stephanie wrote:
> Dear all,
> 
> 
> I think some of sort tool for tracking open requests / issues would 
> indeed be very helpful, so I am all in favour of this proposal. I 
> sometimes find it difficult to keep track of things if they're buried in 
> e-mails alone, so this sounds like a good idea to tackle that.
> 
> 
> All the best,
> 
> 
> Steffi
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *Von:* Peter Saint-Andre <[email protected]>
> *Gesendet:* Dienstag, 4. Februar 2025 23:39:37
> *An:* [email protected]
> *Betreff:* [urn] improved management of registration requests
> Hi all,
> 
> This message is mostly for discussion among the expert review team, but
> I'm sending it to the public list for greater transparency.
> 
> At times, we (mostly I as the team lead) have forgotten to take action
> on registration requests, as just happened with the `c2pa` namespace.
> This is not the quality of service we owe to the community.
> 
> A few years ago I asked IANA whether they plan to offer infrastructure
> so that expert review teams can better manage registration requests.
> They had no such plans at the time, but we could pursue the relevant
> tools independently. The path I have in mind is that we could set up a
> GitHub repository in conformance with RFC 8874 and RFC 8875 (although
> this group is no longer an official IETF Working Group, because it grew
> out of the URN WG the guidance specified in those documents would still
> seem relevant).
> 
> Here is my perspective:
> 
> (1) we would use such a repository primarily for issue tracking
> 
> (2) discussion of substantive matters regarding registration requests
> would still happen on this list
> 
> (3) we might want to keep registration requests under source control,
> for several reasons:
> 
> (a) this might make it easier to work with (some) registrants,
> especially regarding less than substantive matters
> 
> (b) this might make it easier to work on version 2+ of namespace
> registrations
> 
> (c) I usually reformat approved registration requests before final
> submission to IANA (for instance to keep line lengths to 72 characters
> and to ensure consistency across registrations); it would be better if
> these changes, though relatively minor, were done in the open
> 
> (d) source control is good :-)
> 
> I'm curious what other expert review team members, and community members
> in general, think of this idea.
> 
> Peter
> 
> _______________________________________________
> urn mailing list -- [email protected]
> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

_______________________________________________
urn mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]