Re: a question about framing test 14

good evening;

> On 2016-04-05, at 20:51, Dave Longley <> wrote:
> On 03/30/2016 05:23 PM, james anderson wrote:
>>> On 2016-03-30, at 18:42, Dave Longley <
>>> <>> wrote:
>>> On 03/30/2016 12:07 PM, james anderson wrote:
>>>> good afternoon;
>>>>> The framing spec is sorely out-of-date and does not include
>>>>> options like those specified in that issue.
>>>> this reads as if one has yet to decide, what the framing
>>>> algorithm is intended to do.
>>> That is correct. The behavior has not yet been formally
>>> standardized, though most (if not all) implementations currently
>>> have the same behavior. It is a work in progress.
>> that my be a step forward, but it does not seem plausible approach to
>> refer users to several implementations and say, well, try to figure
>> out what they do.
> Sorry -- no one has had any spare time to update the specification and
> there really aren't any other options to point people at. Writing any
> other sort of documentation to explain it would take just as much time
> as updating the spec. I realize the situation is clearly not optimal,
> but these specs are all worked on on a volunteer basis and many of the
> people who work on them are currently engaged in several other related
> efforts. :)
> The spec is up on github -- PRs are welcome!

thank you for the invitation, but - as demonstrated by my uncertainty about these issues, my comprehension of those documents is not sufficient to exercise any authority with respect to changes.

best regards, from berlin,
james anderson | |

Received on Tuesday, 5 April 2016 20:25:35 UTC