Hello,
I support publication of this document, as my concerns with respect to
being too HTTP-centric have been resolved in this version.
A tiny issue: you should probable make HTML and RFC 2616 informative
references rather than normative, as they are used when introducing
examples.
Thanks,
Mykyta Yevstifeyev
01.12.2011 23:07, The IESG wrote:
The IESG has received a request from an individual submitter to consider
the following document:
- 'The Canonical Link Relation'
<draft-ohye-canonical-link-relation-04.txt> as an Informational RFC
The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
final comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the
ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org mailing lists by 2011-12-29. Exceptionally, comments
may be
sent toiesg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org instead. In either case, please retain the
beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting.
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf