We are all working together on the proposal, in an iterative fashion.
This is very similar to the way one develops software projects in Agile
or Extreme programming methodology. First one starts with a prototype.
One gets the major pieces in place, and gets general feedback from the clients.
One checks that it works. Then one iteratively works towards a goal of getting
something that satisfies the clients needs and budget.
But you are correct to demand some real code. I have branched off the particular
topic in AtomAsRDF_PaceAttributesNS [1], so that those that only want to work on
detailed text, can get going debating and refining that.
I would be very thankful if someone with more specification experience could get
it into the correct final format.
Yours sincerely,
Henry Story
[1] http://www.intertwingly.net/wiki/pie/AtomAsRDF_PaceAttributesNS
On 24 Jan 2005, at 18:20, Tim Bray wrote:
On Jan 24, 2005, at 9:01 AM, Henry Story wrote:
Text close to the following should appear in the spec (please make more precise)Who are you asking to make it more precise? -Tim
...
whoever knows for example where it would be best placed in the spec, if it should replace some other sentence, if SHOULD should be capitalized, ...
You don't understand. The only reality is the actual text in the spec. Nothing else exists. Until there is an actual proposal for THE ACTUAL WORDS that are going into the spec, there is nothing. The reason is that after this WG goes away (which it will), the only communication between us and the future is the content of the specification. It is the only subject on which we can have a meaningful debate.
Serious discussion of this subject will not start until there is an actual proposal placed before the WG. --Tim
