On 11/4/05, Tim Bray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Nov 4, 2005, at 6:54 PM, James M Snell wrote:
>
> > Over the past couple of weeks we've been kicking around the -06
> > draft and have seen a significant amount of spirited discussion and
> > new Paces.  As I've been following the discussions, I've had a
> > recurring and nagging feeling that we this stuff could stand a
> > drastic and radical simplification.  Unfortunately, it's not
> > particularly easy to describe what I have in mind in a series of
> > individual paces so I've decided to draft up my ideas as a single
> > chunk included below.
>
> Thanks, and I hope this effort proves useful.
>
> However, I suggest we really don't know where consensus lies.  In
> recent weeks, we've had a substantial number of Paces posted, quite a
> few of them plausible, and a mind-boggling amount of discussion about
> them.  The first step is for your luckless co-chairs to go through
> that discussion and see if there are any obvious consensus calls that
> can be made without even formally scheduling stuff.
>

True, consensus is not screaming out loud yet.

None the less, we seem to have made a real leap with
atom:id. Working out these basic building blocks means
that we have new common ground. It also means that
we need to rethink some things. For this reason I hope
that we stay open to the sort of radical simplification
that James' work here attempts.

Casting off baggage is a big theme in recent paces;
"remove this and we don't need that". I think the sort of
"premise convergence" (I made that up) we are seeing
is the reason for the housecleaning.

In the same vein, I have been doing some creative
thinking of my own today. I guess it was yesterday by
this hour :-)

http://lukearno.com/projects/atom-pub/app-model.html

Opinions anyone?

> Now, it's perfectly OK to make proposals on re-organizing the draft
> to improve it.  But at this point it seems out of line to abandon our
> process, which is showing signs of bearing fruit.
>

Agreed. I hope we get some of the paces in soon
because it gets muddy with too many on the table.
*wink

- Luke

Reply via email to