Re: Straw-man charter for http-bis

On 5/30/07, Paul Hoffman <phoffman@imc.org> wrote:
>
> If the effort for the two are temporally linked (they have to be done
> at the same time), and there will be a lot of overlap in the groups
> working on the two (that is, HTTP implementers and HTTP weenies are
> needed for both efforts), having two WGs seems like a waste of
> resources.

I don't think this follows. Personally, I don't want to participate in
the group working on 2617 until it's clear that it isn't yet another
list full of bombast about "trust", "identity", "federation", and a
bunch of other jargon that never amounts to anything technically
feasible. I don't think there is a good economic argument for bringing
that noise over here, where I definitely do want to participate.

-- 

Robert Sayre

"I would have written a shorter letter, but I did not have the time."