Dear colleagues,
I have read draft-crocker-id-adoption-05.
I'm not opposed to publication, though I confess I'm a little uneasy
with it. This is yet another process document that, no matter how
much the text protests otherwise, will probably be used as a club in
some future contentious WG discussion to try to beat opponents into
submission. If we want to publish this sort of thing, however, this
document is probably fine. I have one small issue.
In section 5.2, there is this:
a single, strong specification. The detailed discussions to merge
are better held in a design team than amidst the dynamics of an open
working group mailing list.
I think it would be better to alter that to "…to merge are often
better held…". I agree that for practical purposes things don't
always need to be thrashed out on the general list, but sometimes the
wider debate (or the very small active population of a WG) means that
a design team is a bad choice, and I don't want this text to give
people an excuse to try to take things "into the back room" when they
shouldn't.
I'll send some nits to the author directly.
Best regards,
A
--
Andrew Sullivan
ajs(_at_)anvilwalrusden(_dot_)com