Re: revised "generic syntax" internet draft

Roy, others:

It is by now quite plain that Roy Fielding and Martin Duerst do
not agree on what the consensus of the group is.

That is no excuse for imputing dishonesty on the other person's part.

In order to have rational debate, we *have* to assume that the other
person is honest, even when he's mistaken, or we can't work.

WRT judging consensus on the issue involved: I detect a much more
positive approach in recent messages in this group, actually looking at
what happens in various situations.
If we are able to resolve it in this way, that is very good; if not,
we might have to call for a face-to-face meeting in Munich in order to
have a better understanding of consensus (if any) on the issue.
We have a long tradition of accepting rough consensus, but only if we're
fairly certain what that consensus is.

                           Harald T. Alvestrand