> On Dec 16, 2014, at 1:07 PM, Dave Cridland <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On 16 Dec 2014 20:23, "Kurt Zeilenga" <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > You have provided no suggestions to the authors of how they might take > > change the ProtoXEP to address your objections. > > Okay, I thought I had given the general actions I'd like to see, but I'll > rephrase. > > The specification describes a very specific solution to a very specific > problem, in a way that matches neither the status quo of existing patterns > within XMPP, nor the common model and terms used elsewhere in the industry. > > I would like to see this recast to be based around the standard industry > model and terms, with a view to ultimately allowing this model to be used > throughout XMPP. I have described this model in loose terms in my initial > email, and I'm happy to expand on this. > >
And can I draw the conclusion you think XACML is the “standard industry model and terms” specification that you want this work “recast” in?
