No, it took a long time because it's so thoughtful and thorough! Great job, Mikkel! On Jan 19, 2013 3:53 AM, "Mikkel Eide Eriksen" <mikkel.erik...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi all, > > Took a little longer than expected due to other commitments, but I've > created an issue here: > https://github.com/FamilySearch/gedcomx/issues/228 > > Please comment as you see fit. > > Mikkel > > On 31/12/2012, at 22.39, Ron Savage <r...@savage.net.au> wrote: > > > Hi Mikkel > > > > On 01/01/13 03:45, Mikkel Eide Eriksen wrote: > >> On 31/12/2012, at 17.31, Philip Durbin<philipdur...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> On 12/30/2012 07:05 PM, Stephen Woodbridge wrote: > >>>> 4. I didn't like the connection to Java either, I see no need for that > >>>> in the spec, if there is some point that they are trying to establish > by > >>>> it, it would be better to just spell it out in details so people that > do > >>>> not work with Java have direct guidance. > >>> > >>> Right, I thought it was odd to read "the GEDCOM X data model is > defined in Java" at http://www.gedcomx.org/Code.html > >>> > >>> Likewise, http://www.gedcomx.org/Community.html says "The GEDCOM X > schemas and interfaces are defined in Java." > >>> > >>> Thank you, everyone, for the great discussion on GEDCOM X. It seems > like something to keep an eye on. > >> > >> I think I saw one of the devs (possibly Ryan Heaton @stoicflame) > comment on an issue at some point that they were moving away from defining > it in terms of Java and rather to have a language-agnostic spec with a > reference implementation in Java. I can't find it just now, but in any > case, I should think that would be the correct way of dealing with it. And > if I'm not misremembering, that should be put on their site in big fat > letters. > >> > >> Perhaps I'll open a ticket next year ;) if I don't find where they said > it. > > > > Yes, open a ticket, politely but firmly reminding them that a > Java-centric view of the world is not the only possible view... > > > > Happy New Year! > > > > And here's hoping this year is even more productive that the last, which > for me at least, was very productive :-). > > > > -- > > Ron Savage > > http://savage.net.au/ > > Ph: 0421 920 622 > >
