On May 17, 2006, at 7:41 PM, Robert Sayre wrote:
On 5/18/06, Lisa Dusseault <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On May 17, 2006, at 10:02 AM, Robert Sayre wrote:
>
> Well, you clearly don't think they're important. But then you felt
> compelled to change them back and got an instant stamp of approval
> from our AD. What happened there?
My question has yet to be answered.
I answered your question as fully as I could from the information I
know, as I reviewed one revision of the draft before agreeing to
shepherd the document. I can't tell you why James made any
particular change from one draft to another but I don't find that
question very relevant to the quality of the final document.
I could still recommend Experimental instead of Standards Track if I
learned of some possible harm to security/privacy or Internet health,
or some deep barrier to interoperability, but I have not yet learned
of a high enough risk+severity of such concerns to change my mind
there.
I think this is an excellent standard. If another individual, such as
myself, were to submit an individually authored document, it would
have to meet the same standard, right?
Yes, along with the other considerations I mentioned earlier in that
email, about usefulness, adoption and review.
I hope that makes the situation clearer!
Sure does!
Good :)
Lisa
