Paul,
I hope I speak for many when I say that your constant nitpicking is
becoming increasingly tiresome. I understand that you feel that the
secretaries are working outside of the boundaries of the tasks and duties
that they were voting in to fulfil. Other voting members on this list
disagree
It's important to reiterate that the implementation of whether services
share or not is exactly that - an implementation detail. For me, this is
not something that the spec should concern itself. I would love to see the
existing container-interop standard considered more here too. The current
This, as in the shared containers thread, is surely an implementation
detail rather than part of the standard? It would be a shame to limit use
of the standard by restricting which character sets are acceptable based on
nominal research by people in the western world (I mean this in terms of
As a developer advocate, my job is not to be responsible for the company
website or Twitter, and I believe that an advocate's role is more of one of
promotion and interaction with customers, which I honestly do not think is
important for the role of a FIG secretary. At this point I see only
to being quite confused as to how this is a controversial
> suggestion, and why people keep misinterpreting it as suggesting to heavily
> restrict legal key values.
>
> --Larry Garfield
>
> On 11/11/2016 05:02 AM, Gary Hockin wrote:
>
> This, as in the shared contai
Yep, I'll sponsor and be involved in the WG.
G
On Wed, 31 Jan 2018 at 15:43 Chuck Burgess <demon.g...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Gary Hockin, Alexander Makarov, Richard Quadling:
> Are you three still available for the initial working group?
>
>
> Core Committee:
> Can I get a
