Re: draft-gregorio-07.html

[Daniel Berlinger <daniel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> > Want to flatten the field again Joe? Pull the Introspection section 
> > from the RFC, with a "To Be Decided" and then let's see where things stand.
> 
> I DO NOT CARE WHICH FORMAT IS USED.
> 
> Can I make that any clearer?

> The wild accusations of a conspiracy aren't going to help
> you make your case and are at least making me 
> regret putting RSD in there to begin with.

Nope, and I'm sure that haven't said anything about a conspiracy... never mind wild accusations of one. And I think I went out of my way, not to imply that you cared, and that you've been reasonable.

And BTW, I've almost stopped caring myself, except that I'm going to have to reimplement stuff if RSD is not chosen and my users want support for Atom... so if I just ignore it, I get to spend money re-implementing with no functional gain. Joy.

> Can we please have a show of hands on what people prefer, either RSD or 
> Introspection, and the next rev of the spec will reflect that vote. 
> I will only  go with feedback that is "on the record", ie on the mailing
> list or on the wiki.

Shame this didn't happen in the first place. If someone can make a technical case I'm all ears. And as Joe knows, I've been completely open to ideas about shifting the RSD to spec from me to wherever the community desires.

Now how about some tech talk? Explain to me why I should reimplement please?

Thanks,

d.

PS Please, please, PLEASE: I did not say (or mean to imply) that the backchannel represented a conspiracy. Simply that discussion took place out of view of the public, and therefore any conclusions cannot be discussed by the rest of us. We don't who said what and why. Please do not put those words into my mouth.