Please stop all this ADSP "good"/ADSP "bad" repetition.
ADSP is finished WGLC and the only thing on our agenda for it now is pushing it further along the process. The might, or might not, require some minor change as a result of the resolution one of the 16 errata for 4871, however, forgetting ADSP, submitting it as experimental, making wholesale changes etc. are just not on our agenda. In this WG we've followed an explicit process of requiring more support/evidence for late changes, when compared to early changes. At this point, a substantive change in the content or direction of ADSP would IMO require its proponent to go away and produce a lot of evidence that a very substantial number of WG participants have in fact changed their opinions. I've seen nothing anywhere approaching that. So there is really no need to regurgitate all those old opinions, it just serves to annoy people. Stephen. _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
