Subject: [apps-discuss] Call for Adoption: draft-masinter-multipart-form-data

From: "Murray S. Kucherawy" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2013 10:42:09 -0700

Colleagues,

Larry Masinter has been developing draft-masinter-multipart-form-data, to
replace RFC2388.  It was supposed to get some agenda time in Berlin but we
ran long (apologies, again, to Larry for that!).  We believe it qualifies
for processing through APPSAWG under our charter and had some prior
discussion on this list in July and August.

This is a call for adoption for doing so.  Please indicate support or
objection on this thread.  We'll make a determination around the end of
this month.

Larry and others, we'd also welcome suggestions for a milestone month/year
for handoff to the IESG.

-MSK, APPSAWG co-chair

---

From: Tony Hansen <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2013 14:28:02 -0400

On 9/16/2013 1:42 PM, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
> Larry Masinter has been developing draft-masinter-multipart-form-data,
> to replace RFC2388.  It was supposed to get some agenda time in Berlin
> but we ran long (apologies, again, to Larry for that!).  We believe it
> qualifies for processing through APPSAWG under our charter and had
> some prior discussion on this list in July and August.
>
> objection on this thread.  We'll make a determination around the end
> of this month.

+1

---

From: Dave Crocker <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2013 11:47:11 -0700

> qualifies for processing through APPSAWG under our charter and had some
> prior discussion on this list in July and August.
>

+1

d/

ps. Perhaps the examples section of his document can include a 
convention for attaching a +1 response form?

-- 
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net

---

From: "John Levine" <[email-masked]>
Date: 16 Sep 2013 19:28:28 -0000

>objection on this thread.  We'll make a determination around the end of

I've actually read the draft and support adoption.

multipart/form-data is very widely used, and it's long past time to
give implementers better advice about how to do it.

R's,
John

---

From: Alexey Melnikov <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2013 11:28:48 +0100

> objection on this thread.  We'll make a determination around the end 

I support WG adoption of this document. I will send my review comments 
separately.