W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-discuss@w3.org > December 1999

Re: HTTP Extensions Framework status?

From: Henrik Frystyk Nielsen <frystyk@microsoft.com>
Date: Tue, 7 Dec 1999 12:56:00 -0800
Message-ID: <00e401bf40f5$7b6401a0$c2bb1eac@redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
To: <hardie@equinix.com>
Cc: "Keith Moore" <moore@cs.utk.edu>, "\"Yaron Goland \(Exchange\)\"" <yarong@exchange.microsoft.com>, "'Patrik Fältström'" <paf@swip.net>, "'Harald Tveit Alvestrand'" <Harald@Alvestrand.no>, "Scott Lawrence" <lawrence@agranat.com>, <discuss@apps.ietf.org>, "\"Josh Cohen \(Exchange\)\"" <joshco@exchange.microsoft.com>, "\"Peter Ford \(Exchange\)\"" <peterf@exchange.microsoft.com>
> Your note below that appointing an app directorate which can
> "object to proposals and provide timely technical/philosophical
> feedback" as a solution seems to me to indicate that you would have
> prefered theory 2 to either theory 1 or theory 3. It also seems to
> miss the point.  The ADs aren't the app area; they are the technical
> managers of the area.  The app area itself needs to have the cycles
> and interest in providing timely technical/philosophical feedback.

My proposal is not to have more app ADs - it is to have a body next to
the ADs that frees them from making architectural decisions and focus on
process. The diversity of the Apps area makes it hard to have an
end2end-interest equivalent and I think such a group has to be chartered
to review documents and to call out dependencies between groups. The
group has to contain app people with a broad knowledge of the app area
and with commitment to actually produce output.

I used the word "directorate" as I believe such groups have existed in
the past in other areas and that this was the term used.

Received on Tuesday, 7 December 1999 15:56:44 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:08:06 UTC