When we were preparing to move HTTP to Draft Standard, we put together a 'feature list' so that we could check off whether there were at least two independent interoperable implementations of every feature. See: http://www.w3.org/Protocols/HTTP/Forum/Reports/ This experience and others in other working groups led me to propose an (experimental) process: http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-newtrk-interop-reports For an extensive feature set document (based on that idea) see: http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-saintandre-xmpp-feature-set I don't know if the working group wants to take on preparing a separate document, but when you're reviewing the document for clarity, it might be useful to review whether the "feature list" could easily be constructed. LarryReceived on Sunday, 4 November 2007 06:58:35 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 06:50:23 GMT