Re: notes from previous Editing Group meeting: goals, docking

Larry Masinter:
>
>In last week's telephone conference, we discussed the
>editing group goals:

Note for readers: the above editing group does not include me.

[...]
>We discussed our proposals for "docking": whether a work item
>is or is not part of the HTTP/1.1 specification. This doesn't
>necessarily mean 'in the same document' but 'as part of
>the same suite of documents'.
>
>Our proposals: 
[...]
>- Content negotiation
>  We concluded (after a lengthy discussion) that we felt
>  the content negotiation work needed a separate focussed
>  effort, with a 'requirements document' as well as a
>  specification. 

Speaking as one of the editors of the transparent content negotiation
stuff, some notes here.

 - I agree that TCN should not be docked with 1.1

 - I think that TCN is basically finished.  It has been for at least
   half a year now.

 - I am getting pressure from some implementers to freeze the TCN stuff
   Real Soon Now.  If I do not freeze soon, they will deploy something
   else, or will deploy something unfrozen.  I think this would be a
   Bad Thing.

 - Therefore, my goal is to freeze the drafts within the next months no
   matter what. If this WG cannot converge on a negotiation
   infrastructure in that time, I will go for freezing them in the
   form of Experimental RFCs, outside of this WG if necessary.

 - While I do not want to prevent anyone from starting a new content
   negotiation effort, beginning with a requirements document, I am not
   available as an editor for such a project.

Thanks,

Koen.

Received on Sunday, 25 May 1997 05:49:19 UTC