Yes. I think the WG already agreed to this. -Doug John Stracke wrote: > > Frank_Dawson@xxxxxxxxx wrote: > > > I agree with Harald that the extensions to iCalendar for CAP > > should follow the IANA registration process defined in RFC > > 2445. > > We should fix the registration process first, though. (Reminder: > the problem is that the Method Reviewer's decision to accept an > extension cannot be appealed. Decisions to reject can be > appealed; but, if the MR's decision to accept is final, then a > single person has the power to define new extensions > unilaterally.)
Attachment:
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature