The Dublin Core Metadata Element Set
draft-kunze-rfc2413bis-07

[Ballot comment]
The inclusion of a language attribute makes this comply with section 4 of
RFC 2277 / BCP 18.  Section 3 of RFC 2277 / BCP 18 doesn't apply because
this is too high level to discuss charsets (it describes meta information
without describing the encoding of that information when it is applied
to a specific protocol context).  When this is mapped to vanilla XML
or XHTML, for example, it would need to comply with the XML charset
requirements (support for both UTF-8 and UTF-16).  When used in an IETF
protocol, we would expect support for UTF-8.

It also uses an international date format, although the syntax is
somewhat more liberal than RFC 3339.  The more liberal syntax is
suitable for such a high level document as the accuracy necessary for
RFC 3339 format may not be available in this context.

I conclude this complies with our internationalization and date-time
requirements.

[Ballot discuss]
I'm happy to clear these before or on the call.

Does this meet our I18N requirements?

I'm really confused about the relation between ANSI and IETF on this.

[Ballot comment]
This document is intended for publication as an Informational RFC. It
  is not an IETF standards-track document.  I wonder if we are going to
  confuse the reader by using the word "standard" when this document
  refers to itself. 
  - Section 2: The fifteen element "Dublin Core" described in this
    standard ...
  - Section 3: The elements described in this standard ...
  - Section 3: ... implementation detail is outside the scope of this
    standard.
  - Appendix A:  This appendix is not part of the standard.
  - Appendix B:  This appendix is not part of the standard.

Last call comment from Stephane Bortzemeyer:

There are a few problems regarding this draft which have been sent to
the author, acknowledged but apparently not fixed in this copy. I
suggest another version before a last call.

(For instance, the reference for the language element is outdated
since both RFC 4646 and ISO 639-3 are now published.)

Author sent a note to RFC-Editor saying he'd like to make more changes before we do IESG Evaluation.  (DId I forget to do an IETF last call?)

Discussion with the author after this appeared on the telechat agenda indicated that a new version of the Dublin Core spec was due to be discussed in September.  Given the likely revision in
October, this was withdrawn from the agenda and shifted to
AD is watching.  The follow-on draft will be submitted to the IESG for processing, rather than through the RFC Editor