The description given: > Indicates that the link context has a resource with geographic information at > the link target
doesn't seem correct; I *believe* the intent is something like: > Refers to a resource with geographic information related to the link context Also, the name requested is extremely generic. If the intent is that this use will be specific to RDAP, the relation name should be correspondingly specific -- e.g., "rdap-geofeed". On the other hand, if the intent is to register a generic name, the language in the specification should explicitly indicate its generic semantics and separate the RDAP case more clearly (e.g., using a "type" attribute to indicate a media type). Moving the registration to a separate document would assist in this. Cheers, > On 15 Mar 2025, at 8:24 am, David Dong via RT > <drafts-expert-review-comm...@iana.org> wrote: > > Dear Mark Nottingham, Julian Reschke, Jan Algermissen (cc: regext WG), > > As the designated experts for the Link Relation Types registry, can you > review the proposed registration in draft-ietf-regext-rdap-geofeed-09 for us? > Please see > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-regext-rdap-geofeed/ > > The due date is March 28th. > > If this is OK, when the IESG approves the document for publication, we'll > make the registration at: > > https://www.iana.org/assignments/link-relations/ > > Unless you ask us to wait for the other reviewers, we’ll act on the first > response we receive. > > With thanks, > > David Dong > IANA Services Sr. Specialist -- Mark Nottingham https://www.mnot.net/ _______________________________________________ regext mailing list -- regext@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to regext-le...@ietf.org
