On 17/01/2019 11.25, Evgeny wrote:
On Thu, Jan 17, 2019 at 1:05 PM, Dave Cridland <[email protected]> wrote:
we do not require it until Final - not even Draft has an absolute
requirement.
I thought transitioning to Draft requires Call For Implementors,
but whatever. Again this raises a question about how sane all
those XEP statuses nowadays. I know this is copied from IETF
workflow, but they have the same problems: a large number of RFCs
without implementations or with abandoned partial implementations.
But since the XSF standards development is severely understaffed
I think raising these questions makes even less sense (actually
this is true for almost any XSF workflow nowadays because of this).
I don't see large numbers of specifications being abandoned as a
problem. It is a trove of thought experiments, some with code to go with
it, that might be of use later. Leaving them as Deferred doesn't costs
us anything.
I also want to note that the list of extensions [1] explicitly hides
Deferred specifications by default to avoid distraction, based on
similar earlier discussions.
[1] https://xmpp.org/extensions/
--
ralphm
_______________________________________________
Standards mailing list
Info: https://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/standards
Unsubscribe: [email protected]
_______________________________________________
