- From: Joseph M. Reagle Jr. <reagle@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2000 11:08:24 -0500
- To: "Peter Lipp" <Peter.Lipp@iaik.at>
- Cc: <w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org>, "Donald E. Eastlake 3rd" <dee3@torque.pothole.com>, "Anders Rundgren" <anders.rundgren@jaybis.com>
At 16:59 11/20/2000 +0100, Peter Lipp wrote: >The idea now was how to proceed. Options are > >- that this was a stupid idea from the beginning and everybody involved > should be ashamed >- to have it as an activity which would be ideally placed within the > PKIX-group (which is not really an option as Steven Kent and many > others would not support it) >- to have it as a new activity of the XML-DSig WG Hi Peter, Perhaps with sentiments similar to Steven Kent but in the W3C context, I think an activity should be its own WG with a specific and focused charter/requirements of its own [1]. [1] http://www.w3.org/People/Reagle/chairing-a-WG.html#Closing __ Joseph Reagle Jr. W3C Policy Analyst mailto:reagle@w3.org IETF/W3C XML-Signature Co-Chair http://www.w3.org/People/Reagle/
Received on Monday, 20 November 2000 11:08:47 UTC