Dave (and John),
Dave CROCKER wrote:
On 7/7/2011 8:52 AM, Alexey Melnikov wrote:
I think there are some bugs in ABNFs of DSN, MDN and MIME I would
like to see
fixed. I don't remember anything else worth doing in any other specs,
but I
reserve the right to change my mind.
I am a bit confused.
I thought the purpose of yam was to advance some documents, but that
the continuing flux in the formal standards process prompted a wg
decision to put things on hold until the standards process issues were
resolved.
>From what I can tell, they aren't resolved yet.
What I thought was /not/ a primary goal of yam was to become another
drums effort, cleaning up existing specs.
Not that such an effort might not be worth considering, but rather
than it was a non-goal for /this/ group.
Firstly, what I proposed above is fixing specs to align with what is
already in wide use. For example, the latest MDN spec removed some
implementation choices (due to lack of deployments), however its ABNF
was broken in the process by only partially removing unused productions.
So the ABNF is actually more broken than in the previous version of the
spec.
Secondly, we are talking about rechartering and any agreements about the
purpose of the WG that were reached before don't have to apply. Many
IETF WGs when recharter end up doing things specifically prohibited by
their previous Charters. So your comment about "non-goal for this group"
doesn't make any sense to me.
_______________________________________________
yam mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/yam
