Re: Last Call: <draft-yevstifeyev-disclosure-relation-00.txt> (The 'disclosure' Link Relation Type) to Informational RFC

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



11.12.2011 22:05, Julian Reschke wrote:
Hi there,

Hi Julian,


feedback below:

1. Introduction


   RFC 5988 [RFC5988] defined a way of indicating relationships between
   resources on the Web.  This document specifies a new type of such
   relationship - 'disclosure' Link Relation Type.  It designates a list
   of patent disclosures or a particular patent disclosure itself made
   with respect to material for which such relation is specified.

s/-/- the/?

Will fix.


   Active use of 'disclosure' relation type has been identified.  The
   current version of W3C Publication Rules [W3C-PUBRULES], Bullet 36 of
   Section 5, defines that each W3C document must have the boilerplate
   referring to the page where one may find patent disclosures made with
   regard to such document.  As W3C Publication Rules are applied to
   many documents, that might be under different patent policies, a
   number of variants of the mentioned boilerplate exist.  However, the
   phrase "W3C maintains a public list of any patent disclosures made in
   connection with the deliverables of the group; that page also
   includes instructions for disclosing a patent." can be found in each
   of these variants.  Publication Rules specify that, in the source
   code, it must look like:

     W3C maintains a <a rel="disclosure" href="...">public list of any
     patent disclosures</a> made in connection with the deliverables of
     the group; that page also includes instructions for disclosing a
     patent.

Maybe it's worth pointing out that this does not apply as verbatim instruction, but as HTML example.

I have that - "in source code".  Maybe I should add "in HTML source code"?

It would be good to confirm with the W3C that this actually is a requirement and not only a suggestion (cc'ing the author of PUBRULES).

And I have this as well, as I've introduced this extract with "must look like".


   Such provisions existed in previous versions of Publication Rules as
   well, so such source text is often found in different W3C documents
   that predated publication of RFC 5988 significantly.  However,
   'disclosure' relation type has not been mentioned in RFC 5988 when
   creating the registry for relation types; nor was it registered
   separately.

I think the paragraph above is misleading. It was not the point of RFC 5988 to define all current link relations (it *did* add existing HTML4 relations and Atom relations to the new registry but that's a separate thing).

This may be read as if RFC 5988 is to determine all the rel types that were used at the time of its writing, but I don't think the paragraph directly implies this. I mean that it hasn't been registered either centralized (in RFC 5988) or separately here.



2. 'disclosure' Link Relation Type

   Whenever the 'disclosure' relation is defined, the target IRI MUST
   either

   (1) designate a list of patent disclosures, or

   (2) refer to a particular patent disclosure made with respect to the
       material being referenced by context IRI.

I think in both cases the patent disclosure(s) apply to the context, no?

Yes.  I may change to:

   Whenever the 'disclosure' relation is defined, the target IRI MUST
   either

   (1) designate a list of patent disclosures, or

   (2) refer to a particular patent disclosure

   made with respect to the material being referenced by context IRI.

to improve readability.



   This section provides several examples of possible use of
   'disclosure' relation type.

   If the page <http://example.org/ipr/meta-spec/> contains a list of
   patent disclosures made with respect to the specification found at
<http://example.org/specs/meta-spec/spec.html>, the latter would have
   the following fragment of HTML source code:

<html>
     ...
     Please visit
<a rel="disclosure" href="http://example.org/ipr/meta-spec/";> the
     IPR page</a> for the list of patent disclosures made with respect
     to this specification.
     ...
</html>

   Or, in the case of Link header field, the HTTP response would contain
   the following header field:

     Link: <http://example.org/ipr/meta-spec/>; rel="disclosure";
     title="Patent Disclosures List"

   (Please note that the actual header field will not contain the line
   break after 'rel' parameter.)

It could if the second line was indented; maybe adjust the example?

I have:

     Link: <http://example.org/ipr/meta-spec/>; rel="disclosure";
     title="Patent Disclosures List"

both lines are indented with 5 Courier white spaces, and so I think my explanation in parentheses is correct.




Appendix A. Acknowledgments


   Thanks to Bjoern Hoehrmann for noticing that 'disclosure' relation is
   not properly specified and, correspondingly, initiating this work.
   The author would also like to acknowledge the contributions of <TBD>
   to this document.

Who's this TBD guy? :-)

You probably :-).

Mykyta Yevstifeyev


Best regards, Julian
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf


_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf


[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]