perhaps take Sam's "great effort to Insure that:" and
put it in the document as a requirement for updating 3986,
so the interop testing for 3986-conformance doesn't have
to be repeated if URL and 3986 agree for almost all values
that 3986 considers valid, and the differences carefully
explained and justified.
At the moment, this information is in 5.6 (third bullet).
as a requirement on URL-LS ....
based on http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ietf-w3c/2014Dec/0088.html
From an IETF perspective, what are the requirements for any update for a "Full" standard? I think that's the concern that needs to be addressed.
http://tools.ietf.org/html/bcp9#section-6.3