Subject: [apps-discuss] Reviewers, please, for draft-ietf-appsawg-uri-get-off-my-lawn

From: "Murray S. Kucherawy" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2013 12:32:12 -0800

There was originally quite a bit of support for this document, but I
haven't seen any reviews or comments posted about it since its adoption as
a WG item.  Could people give it a review and post comments, please?  If
it's ready for last call as-is, that would be useful to know as well.

Thanks,
-MSK

---

From: Erik Wilde <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 05 Dec 2013 13:14:48 -0800

hello all.

On 2013-12-05, 12:32 , Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
> haven't seen any reviews or comments posted about it since its adoption
> as a WG item.  Could people give it a review and post comments, please?
> If it's ready for last call as-is, that would be useful to know as well.

http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-discuss/current/msg10722.html 
is where i commented on this draft a little while ago. i think it is 
useful as it is, but (as written in that earlier comment), it might be 
even more useful is it listed some popular anti-patterns as well. i've 
become a fan of well-explained anti-patterns (meaning that there should 
be an easy-to-follow explanation of *why* they should be avoided), as 
they work well as educational examples, and as references to point 
people to.

i'd be more than happy to collect, curate, and contribute a couple of 
anti-patterns, if people think that would be a useful thing to add. i 
don't think there's a shortage of those in existing work out there :-)

cheers,

dret.

-- 
erik wilde | mailto:[email-masked]  -  tel:+1-510-2061079 |
            | UC Berkeley  -  School of Information (ISchool) |
            | http://dret.net/netdret http://twitter.com/dret |

---

From: Peter Saint-Andre <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 05 Dec 2013 20:17:43 -0700

On 12/5/13 2:14 PM, Erik Wilde wrote:
>> There was originally quite a bit of support for this document,
>> but I haven't seen any reviews or comments posted about it since
>> its adoption as a WG item.  Could people give it a review and
>> post comments, please? If it's ready for last call as-is, that
>> would be useful to know as well.
> 
> useful as it is, but (as written in that earlier comment), it might
> be even more useful is it listed some popular anti-patterns as
> well.

Having just read the I-D again, I would concur that more examples
would be helpful.

Peter

- -- 
Peter Saint-Andre
https://stpeter.im/

---

From: Mark Nottingham <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2013 16:46:31 +1100

> Having just read the I-D again, I would concur that more examples

I'm more than happy to incorporate more examples (I shied away from doing so a bit so as not to ruffle feathers of particular efforts).

As I've said many times, I strongly do NOT want this to become a repository of anti-patterns, because doing so will inevitably become an attractive nuisance and seriously delay this document. This isn't the last BCP ever published; there will be ample opportunity in other, future documents to document more bad things people do.

Cheers,

--
Mark Nottingham   http://www.mnot.net/