Le 2014-07-22 à 14:27, Andrew Sullivan <[email protected]> a écrit :

> On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 02:16:39PM -0400, Marc Blanchet wrote:
>> - maybe it will be better to have different experts so that they look at the 
>> problem with different eyes (in this context, more eyes is a feature). but 
>> they would be better to coordinate. not sure it needs to be  written
> 
> I think it would be _terrible_ to have different experts here, unless
> there's an interlock between then registries.  If there are two
> experts, they might draw different conclusions.  Indeed, John, Patrik,
> and I all came to different conclusions about the most recent version
> of Unicode, and it was only after considerable discussion that Patrik
> and I understood what John was worried about.  

For the same reasons, I come to the other conclusion: another expert will be 
good to have another set of eyes to carefully look at the unicode changes.  
They just need to coordinate themselves. And very likely, the two experts know 
each other very well...   I'm not concerned too much about a lock where they 
will have a different opinion on the result. At that time, they could go to the 
wg(s) to further discussion and come to agreement.

Marc.


> Different decisions
> between the experts would be extremely bad.
> 
> I know there's a hurry to get this out, but hoping the experts get it
> right if there's no interlock is too dangerous.
> 
> A
> 
> -- 
> Andrew Sullivan
> [email protected]

_______________________________________________
precis mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/precis

Reply via email to