It is axiomatic that IETF WGs do not operate in a vacuum. It
is always necessary to consider the relationship to other
IETF work, at a high level at least. This one's right up
there with motherhood and apple pie. And WGs that fail to
this so can have a VERY rough time at IETF last call, and
have on occasions been sent back to the drawing board.
That is precisely my point.
Dave's 'poll' is intended by his own admission to exclude this precise
type of work from the group.
All I am arguing for here is that the DKIM group define its relationship
to two existing pieces of work, PKIX and XKMS.
In addition to this being the right thing institutionally, it represents
an important test of whether the specification is ready for standards
acceptance. Until the group can explain how their work relates to what
went before they have no business being accredited as a standard.
No working group is an island...
Whether or not W3C work enjoys the same status is an
interesting question. I don't think it does, if only because
most IETFers aren't all tha familiar with the entire range of
W3C activities.
It may not have the same status institutionally but liasons are defined
in both directions.