On 6/17/15 3:47 PM, Dave Cridland wrote:
On 17 June 2015 at 22:41, Peter Saint-Andre - &yet <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:On 6/17/15 3:33 PM, Dave Cridland wrote: I meant to say that Carbons wasn't even on there before, whereas it's now pretty much essential. Agreed with respect to the technology. With respect to the process, the Carbons XEP is still Experimental. I think that it's not right to make a XEP part of a compliance suite if it's still Experimental. But that can be solved by moving the XEP forward on the standards track. Well, I think it's OK (and possibly even useful) to include Experimental extensions in the compliance suite while the suite is itself Experimental. As I said to Sam, I think it'd be useful to build the shopping list, and then we can figure out where additional work is needed.
Sure. :-)
