The Item and Collection Link Relations
draft-amundsen-item-and-collection-link-relations-05

Note: This ballot was opened for revision 05 and is now closed.

(Peter Saint-Andre; former steering group member) Yes

(Adrian Farrel; former steering group member) No Objection

I have no objection to the publication of this document as an RFC, but
I have a couple of Comments you could look at along the way.

---

I found it odd that this "specification" is Informational since it does
define things.

---

The RFC Editor will want you to remove the citation from the Abstract.
If you are providing a revised version, please fix this.

---
                      
I would have preferred you to explicitly name the registry in which you
want new entries recorded.

(Pete Resnick; former steering group member) No Objection

(Ralph Droms; former steering group member) No Objection

(Robert Sparks; former steering group member) No Objection

(Ron Bonica; former steering group member) No Objection

(Russ Housley; former steering group member) (was Discuss) No Objection

(Sean Turner; former steering group member) No Objection

For the secdir reviewer:

s4: r/are not believed to/do not

(Stephen Farrell; former steering group member) No Objection

Would it be worth saying whether both item and collection
can occur in the same href?

(Stewart Bryant; former steering group member) No Objection

I agree with Adrian's comments

(Wesley Eddy; former steering group member) No Objection

The usefulness of this was not really clear to me, and the references are either just webpages or works-in-progress, so it's unclear to me whether it's really in-use or will actually be used.  However, I'm not personally concerned with the tidiness of this registry and trust the judgement of the ADs closer to it.