- From: Larry Masinter <masinter@parc.xerox.com>
- Date: Wed, 15 May 1996 18:42:07 PDT
- To: http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com
My take on "process" is that a) we're working hard to produce a draft specification that implementors can implement and implementors will agree to implement and everyone else agrees too. b) at this point, who said what when and in what committee doesn't matter very much. There's no point in asking for a review if we're not willing to then change the thing based on the review! Presumably, if the subgroups really worked out the groundwork, the members of the subgroups can defend what the subgroups produced. If they didn't, then the draft unravels at that point and we have to try again. The bottom line: keep the arguments on the mailing list to the technical points, and specifically about specific elements of the -03 draft. Your comments are needed by the end of the week so that the editorial group can process them next week. There'll be another draft with a marked set of differences for you to re-review. This will be over one way or another in a couple of weeks. End of process sermon. If you want to argue more about process, send me private mail. Larry
Received on Wednesday, 15 May 1996 18:43:38 UTC