At 12:54 PM 4/9/00 -0500, Pete Resnick wrote:
Dave's message only said that technical merit has no bearing on
publication of Informational or
This is a good example of the reason this apsect of debate is a major waste
of time.
Although Pete is attempting to support my comments -- and I equally concur
with his point of view -- in fact I did not say what he offers as the
summary of my statement. What I said was actually quite
different. However, further debating who said what is not where things
should go.
In other words, folks, we all -- and Pete is better than average readers of
this list, not worse -- tend to mis-read was is written and to argue
polemically, rather than attentively and incrementally.
It is my understanding that the draft in question has been referred to a
working group (wrec). So, debate about that draft should move to that
working group's list.
Except that...
That working group does not have this topic on it's charter and this seems
an extraordinarily major and difficult topic, to leave as only an
incidental goal of a working group.
It strikes me that it would be much, much more productive to fire up a
working group focused on this topic, since we have known of the application
level need for about 12 years, if not longer.
d/
=-=-=-=-=
Dave Crocker <dcrocker(_at_)brandenburg(_dot_)com>
Brandenburg Consulting <www.brandenburg.com>
Tel: +1.408.246.8253, Fax: +1.408.273.6464
675 Spruce Drive, Sunnyvale, CA 94086 USA