Re: STOP! Re: An IRC discussion with Alexandre Bertails re SSUE-19:

On 6 Jun 2013, at 23:36, Arnaud Le Hors <lehors@us.ibm.com> wrote:

> Hi Henry, 
> I have no doubts that everyone involved is trying to move us forward, including you. However, while you think you have proven your point it is clear that others disagree and I don't see any signs of actual progress being made. 

difficult to say from the outside.

> 
> We can just keep repeating the same things over and over hoping that somehow it will lead to a different result or recognize that people have different opinions that are irreconcilable. I'm proposing we go for the latter and look for a compromise. This is what standardization is about. 

I don't keep repeating the same things over and over. I keep substantiating them with more and more
spec text, and more detailed arguments.

Now judging the validity of arguments is not easy I agree: You can't just do that by looking 
at how many people you find on each side of an argument.

> 
> Thanks.
> --
> Arnaud  Le Hors - Software Standards Architect - IBM Software Group
> 
> 
> Henry Story <henry.story@bblfish.net> wrote on 06/06/2013 02:25:20 PM:
> 
> > From: Henry Story <henry.story@bblfish.net> 
> > To: Arnaud Le Hors/Cupertino/IBM@IBMUS, 
> > Cc: public-ldp-wg@w3.org 
> > Date: 06/06/2013 02:26 PM 
> > Subject: Re: STOP! Re: An IRC discussion with Alexandre Bertails re SSUE-19: 
> > 
> > On 6 Jun 2013, at 22:11, Arnaud Le Hors <lehors@us.ibm.com> wrote: 
> > 
> > Hi everyone, 
> > 
> > I would like to ask this discussion to stop. I really don't think 
> > this is leading anywhere and it's filling up everybody's mailbox. 
> > 
> > 
> > There is no magic. In one way or another the client needs to figure 
> > out that it is dealing with an LDP server. This can be done at the 
> > HTTP level, at the RDF level, or possibly both. 
> > 
> > We evidently have two different sets of people arguing for one way 
> > vs the other. As I said before, I think each way has its pros and 
> > cons. An objective discussion about the pros and cons would be 
> > useful but instead the discussion turns into a religious battle. 
> > This is not helpful. 
> > 
> > I don't think there are pros and cons at all. I am also tired about 
> > this discussion, as I have spent 
> > an inconsiderate amount of time going into greater and greater 
> > detail with more and more official 
> > spec references defending this position (as I was asked to do) 
> > The most detailed e-mail on this subject was put forward in the 
> > lates email I sent 
> > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ldp-wg/2013Jun/0045.html 
> > 
> > The conclusion drawn is in my view about as clear as 2+2=4. 
> > 
> > I will send a separate note on how I see the problem and propose a 
> > possible solution to get us moving forward. In the meantime, if you 
> > want to keep rehashing the same points, please, do so somewhere else. 
> > 
> > I would love us to move on to another topic, as I myself have other 
> > things to do. But I would appreciate 
> > a bit of thankfulness for the time I and others  spent clarifiying 
> > these issue. There is a time when discussion 
> > comes to an end, and it is fine to make a statement that the 
> > arguments have been developed to their 
> > logical conclsion, but your mail makes it sound like we have been 
> > wasting people's time. We did not bring 
> > these issues up, we were asked to defend them, and we did so out of good will. 
> > 
> > It is true that I can't imagine how I could go much futher in this 
> > argument without it becoming extreemly 
> > tedious in terms of formalisms. It's possible to do that, but it 
> > would certainly not be the best way 
> > for this group to spend its time. 
> > 
> > Sincerely, 
> > 
> > Henry 
> > 
> > 
> > Thank you.
> > --
> > Arnaud  Le Hors - Software Standards Architect - IBM Software Group 
> > 
> > Social Web Architect 
> > http://bblfish.net/

Social Web Architect
http://bblfish.net/