Re: EAI WG status and rechartering

Martin J. Dürst wrote:

> Hello Alexey,
>
> On 2009/11/21 3:08, Alexey Melnikov wrote:
>
>> If the WG has enough energy to recharter, I would also like to ask the
>> WG to take mailto: URI scheme update (draft-duerst-mailto-bis) as an
>> additional deliverable.
>
> I'm not sure this makes sense, for two reasons:
>
> - While draft-duerst-mailto-bis is very much about internationalization
>   (it allows non-ASCII characters in things such as Subject and body,
>    which the current RFC doesn't), it isn't actually about EAI
>
> - The draft has already been out for quite a long time, it doesn't seem
>   to make sense to wait for other EAI drafts to complete and then the
>   WG to recharter to move on.

I agree with both statements.

> That said, it would be possible (I'd even say appropriate) for a 
> rechartered WG to take up the job of either further updating what 
> might by that time be the RFC resulting from draft-duerst-mailto-bis 
> (essentially continuing what was 
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-eai-mailto-01), or of creating a 
> new URI/IRI scheme for EAI mail addresses. [I'd be glad to volunteer 
> as an editor in either case.]

Yes, I mostly meant this work item.

I think that draft-duerst-mailto-bis is essentially ready for IETF LC. 
If no major objections are raised during IETF LC, then it can be 
published as an RFC. However if there are some objections, the document 
might require a new or existing WG to help build/judge consensus.