RE: BP2 Name Problem: Delivery context assumed not stated?

Hi,

Sean I am right with you on this...

> Being a broken record here, but this is also my 
> understanding, and an understanding that seems to underpin 
> the document. This is why I am not sure it was wise to decide 
> that there is no ADC, because there is in this doc, even if 
> not called by name. I'll call it "iPhone-ish". We can say we 
> don't want to name and ADC, but then if we do in spirit 
> anyway, not admitting it is only a handicap.

I keep raising the same point - we would be well served to define an
ADC.

One thing of what you said I don't agree with or at least with the
implication - the iPhone-ish thing.
This sentiment that the iPhone is something special and is to be upheld
as some hard to reach goal.

I think ee need something like an ADC, something neutral.


-- Kai