Re: comments JP-4 how to proceed?

On 27/02/12 20:49, Gregory Williams wrote:
> On Feb 27, 2012, at 7:35 AM, Axel Polleres wrote:
>>> I willing to spec for 2.1 (DISTINCT modifier on path components)
>>> but not in the framework you outlined in the telecon which was to
>>> produce all the spec material, then decide which option the WG
>>> will pursue.  I don't think people will engage in a process to
>>> come up with the necessary design on the basis it might all be
>>> thrown out based on reasons we have before the spec work starts.
>> Ok, so how do the other s think here? Andy's is the only answer I
>> got. Given that he volunteers to spec it out, can we have a vote on
>> whether we are willing to bring this into the spec (particularly,
>> also as there was a slight majority on the call two weeks ago for
>> the DISTINCT() option):
> I'm not sure when I'd have time to actually implement the new
> semantics, but I'm willing to support this plan so long as we believe
> it will satisfy those commenters who have indicated resistance to the
> current state of property paths.

Good point - maybe we should send a intermediate response when we have 
decided on the plan to get feedback sooner rather than later.


Received on Tuesday, 28 February 2012 09:20:06 UTC