Niclas Hedhman wrote:
It is not really practical to proceed with specification works by mail in long feedback cycles and a dozen people tearing every single little detail into shreds, for whatever reasons.
In my own experience - writing a specification is something you do outside of a forum like this. Where the community plays into this is in peer review process. Get a specification up and submit it and then we (community) have the big-picture. Give that process a few iterations and you will end up with both a complete spec, community engagement and ownership in the process.
COP is all about interoperability. Specifications are key to a success, and I think that one must start working out all the underlying specifications to a fairly great detail.
+1
The first round of goals are;
1. A definition of COP.
2. A Specification Framework Model.
3. A initial set of Specifications addressing all the relevant areas of COP.
4. A COP Infrastructure project, which allows for publishing and usage of components.
In this process I think it would be good to provide a link to work-in-progress. Main objective it to ensure that nobody feels excluded - but at the same extent - yes - this need to be hatched in a constructive non-partisan environment.
If you feel that your thinking is in line with mine, and would like to be part of the long and ardeous journey, drop me a mail or contact me by ICQ#7643698.
Well, you have my email address and ICQ number so take this as a "count me in" message!
Cheers, Steve.
Cheers Niclas
--
|------------------------------------------------| | Magic by Merlin | | Production by Avalon | | | | http://avalon.apache.org/merlin | | http://dpml.net/merlin/distributions/latest | |------------------------------------------------|
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
