The probably-last gang of issues
Greetings again. Sam's recent work queue rotation marks what we consider to be the likely final rotation before we are finished with the Atom format draft. That is, the goal is that, once we accept or close all of the items from the rotation, the format document editors will have a complete picture of what the WG wants in the Atom format spec. (For those of you new to this process, the full list of currently under discussion is at http://www.intertwingly.net/wiki/pie/AtomPubIssuesList.) This ties in nicely with our goal of turning the format spec in for IETF Last Call before March. Of course, changes can (and probably will) be made based on the input to the WG from the IETF Last call. Those changes can come from the IETF community as a whole or from the WG as we stare one more time at the document (and as the implementers write code to it). However, there is a goal of not needing to revise the document after IETF Last Call; that is, we don't send the document to the IETF for review if we know that there are topics on which there is WG consensus that is not reflected in the document. So, please take a look at all of the Paces listed as currently under discussion and comment freely. We're getting close to being finished, which is of course the over-arching goal. --Paul Hoffman, Director --Internet Mail Consortium
Re: The probably-last gang of issues
2 questions: 1. Is there a deadline for new feature proposals? Has it passed? There's one I want to make that depends on whether or not one in the current round is accepted. 2. The Pace process doesn't encourage proposing minor (editorial, style, etc) changes. It also seems to have encouraged proposals that are good in principle but poorly worded to be incorporated. Will there be a period of time for nitpicking and copyediting? Graham smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
Re: The probably-last gang of issues
On Jan 24, 2005, at 5:45 PM, Graham wrote: 1. Is there a deadline for new feature proposals? Has it passed? There's one I want to make that depends on whether or not one in the current round is accepted. This being an IETF WG, you can always post a comment to a draft. If rough consensus occurs, in it goes. The current flurry is about achieving closure on a bunch of known issues, and about our belief that the Atom data format is getting nicely cooked; but the door isn't closed until the IESG says done. 2. The Pace process doesn't encourage proposing minor (editorial, style, etc) changes. It also seems to have encouraged proposals that are good in principle but poorly worded to be incorporated. Will there be a period of time for nitpicking and copyediting? I think it's be just fine to have editorial and style and language debates right here on the WG any old time. It might be nice to put [Editorial] or some such in the subject line. -Tim
Re: The probably-last gang of issues
Paul Hoffman wrote: At 1:45 AM + 1/25/05, Graham wrote: 2. The Pace process doesn't encourage proposing minor (editorial, style, etc) changes. Fully agree. -05 is almost done right now. All valid -04 documents are valid -05 documents. Many editorial suggestions have been incorporated. I suspect Graham will prefer it. We can pick up the pace to incorporate wording and nitpick changes. Robert Sayre
