[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: IETF action

To: "'Joe Gregorio'" <joe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "'Atom Syntax''" <atom-syntax@xxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: IETF action
From: "Bob Wyman" <bob@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2004 13:30:47 -0400
In-reply-to: <>
List-archive: <http://www.imc.org/atom-syntax/mail-archive/>
List-id: <atom-syntax.imc.org>
List-unsubscribe: <mailto:atom-syntax-request@imc.org?body=unsubscribe>
Reply-to: <bob@xxxxxxxx>
Sender: owner-atom-syntax@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Thread-index: AcRQhYVFEXv9YPJIQQ+Jf7uh3KGYBwAHRAPA

Joe Gregorio wrote:
> I strongly disagree. There has been plenty of time
> for discussion since Sam Ruby posted a draft IETF
> working group charter for Atom *back in February*.
> We applied to the IETF, they accepted us. Let's move on
> to the issue list like Tim suggested.
+1
	While I am afraid that W3C might have been a better choice, I
strongly agree that there has been sufficient time and energy put into
discussing the subject. The decision has been made. We're doing this in the
IETF. Now, let's move on to getting it done.

		bob wyman

Follow-Ups:
- RE: IETF action
  - From: Don Park

References:
- Re: IETF action
  - From: Joe Gregorio

Prev by Date: It's about the Entries, Stupid!
Next by Date: Re: Semantics
Previous by thread: Re: IETF action
Next by thread: RE: IETF action
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread