On Sat, Oct 2, 2010 at 1:28 PM, Joel M. Halpern <[email protected]> wrote:
> Joel M. Halpern, acting as document shepherd
Joel,
I realize my comments are probably out of order, but I offer that were
the group polled at this time, I think it likely you would find
uncharacteristically strong consensus in favor of the following two
questions:
1. Should section 17 of draft 14 be cut following the second sentence
("the group did not reach rough consensus on a single best
approach.")?
2. Should the word "recommendation" be removed from the document's
title, replaced with a more neutral appellation such as "report,"
"analysis," or "results?"
Perhaps I'm mistaken and I'll happily eat crow if I am, but I think it
would be unfortunate for all involved if the document proceeded to
publication on procedural technicalities without these questions
having ever been asked and answered.
Regards,
Bill Herrin
--
William D. Herrin ................ [email protected] [email protected]
3005 Crane Dr. ...................... Web: <http://bill.herrin.us/>
Falls Church, VA 22042-3004
_______________________________________________
rrg mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg
