Re: Reviewing ancient independent submissions

[ned.freed@mrochek.com]

Some comments on the various documents on this list:

> draft-tiwari-appl-wxxx-forms-01.txt
> 	"application/w-xxx-forms Media Type"
> 	Submitted 7/18/01
> 	Signficant rewrite needed
> 	(We also have some doubts about the usefulness of this RFC, but
> 	not sufficient to reject it.)

There are many issues with this draft:

(1) Refers to "character sets" and "ISO 8859_1". Should refer to "charsets"
    and "ISO-8859-1" instead.

(2) The document must have a security considerations section, but does not.
    Additionally, the security considerations section for the media type
    registration says "none", which is flatly unacceptable for any media type,
    especially one such as this: Security issues abound in the Web forms
    space.

(3) The encoding considerations section of the media type registration is
    being misused. Specifically, this section is supposed to indicate what
    sort of content is involved in the type, i.e. whether it consists of 7bit,
    8bit, or binary data. Instead the section is being used to describe the
    actual media type format. This is not what it is for.

(4) The various pieces of syntax and descriptive text given do not seem
    sufficient to describe the format of this media type as a whole. In
    particular, the format seems to be defined by example rather than by
    giving the actual syntactic rules for the thing. 

(5) The relationship of this media type to the multipart/form-data media type
    described in RFC 2388 should be described.

For these reasons I do not recommend publication of this document in its
present form.

> draft-eastlake-proto-doc-pov-04.txt
> 	"Protocol versus Document Viewpoints"
> 	Submitted 9/24/01
> 	Author revise: Very interesing document; work with author on
> 	editorial issues, then publish.

I like this document, and agree that after various typos and such are
addressed it should be published.

> draft-new-apex-server-02.txt
> 	"APEX Endpoint Servers"
> 	Submitted 10/9/01
> 	Author revise: minor editorial issues
	
This document was withdrawn from publication by the author back in January
2002. Here is a pointer to the author's statement to this effect in the
official APEX WG archives:

  http://lists.beepcore.org/pipermail/apexwg/2002-January/000445.html

I will initiate an action to have the iesg-secretariat communicate this
officially to the RFC Editor.

				Ned