On 22 June 2017 at 21:49, Sam Whited <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, Jun 22, 2017 at 3:30 AM, Dave Cridland <[email protected]> wrote: >> If it really is the name, then let's call it "Stable". > > I actually do think that would be very helpful; I can't tell you how > often random people I'm talking too say "we tried XMPP, but it didn't > have the feature we wanted" and I say "sure it did, that's XEP-XXXX" > and they reply "no, that was only draft, and we needed a working > version right then". Some variation of that is a significant portion > of conversations I end up having with random people who have tried > XMPP.
Names are important, I agree. We picked Draft - I think, it was well before my time - because that's what the IETF used. It's since ceased to be used there; they go straight from Proposed Standard to Internet Standard. We could, equally well, go for the same, but if we're picking terms because of their utility for marketing (and I don't think that's a bad thing to do) then "Stable" seems the better option. It might even be worth having "Unstable", or "Alpha", or something for Experimental, but I'm not so sure about that. I'd rather imply "Bleeding Edge" than "Broken". Dave. _______________________________________________ Standards mailing list Info: https://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/standards Unsubscribe: [email protected] _______________________________________________
