On Fri, Feb 23, 2018 at 09:36:50AM -0500, Lou Berger wrote:
> I think we're going in circles here. We have one camp that wants to replace
> the current module with pre 09 and is unwilling to discuss compromise, and
> another camp that wants 08 published as is and has been waiting for the
> working group and authors to submit aversion to the IESG for publication
> based on the last call that completed in November.
It seems the group in favor of pre 09 is in favor of it because the
solution integrates with YLbis, i.e., _one_ way to represent schema
> The mail I sent that started this thread was sent with the hope of finding a
> compromise. As you and Martin seem uninterested in discussing a compromise,
> I not sure if it's worth pursuing this thread. If I have misread your mails,
> and you are open to compromise then we should continue this thread.
I assume the group in favor of pre 09 finds it difficult to
'compromise' on something that does not provide the benefit of
integrating with YLbis.
> If not and there is no interest in finding a compromise in the working group
> and by the authors, I guess we're back to the plan of publishing 08 and
> looking forward to protests.
To investigate the possibility of a compromise, we need to understand
what both groups find unacceptable and where there is room for finding
- For the pre 09 'camp', it seems integration with YLbis is the key
technical requirement that is driving them.
What is the key technical critical issue for the other camp?
Juergen Schoenwaelder Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
Phone: +49 421 200 3587 Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany
Fax: +49 421 200 3103 <https://www.jacobs-university.de/>
netmod mailing list