[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Report from the CALSCH WG meeting at the 58th IETF on 11/11/03
Nathaniel Borenstein wrote:
The CALSCH WG (really a minor fraction thereof) met in Minneapolis.
Both WG chairs and the editor of the only open document were absent
(the latter due to Jabber-related technical difficulties) from the
meeting. At the invitation of Pat Egen, I chaired the meeting.
Obviously the absence of so many key people made a major decision
inappropriate. However, there was apparent consensus for considering
several steps that we hope will reinvigorate the WG, and that we are
proposing to the mailing list for wider consideration.
1. The Changing of the Bobs: Bob Morgan has volunteered to come in as
WG chair in place of Bob Mahoney, who has been under increasing time
pressure and wishes to step down.
Thank you Bob Mahoney for all your work. Welcome Bob Morgan.
2. The Changing of the Bards: I have volunteered to perform One More
Round of edits on the CAP document, with an eye to having a Last Call
for Proposed Standard status by March. I want to express my gratitude
to Doug Royer for getting the document to the point where the remaining
problems are small enough for me to view that as an easy target date.
3. The Changing of the Paradigms: Lisa Dusseault has volunteered to
write a first outline of what a WebDAV-enabled calendar access
mechanism might look like.
4. The Changing of the Version: There was general consensus that, CAP
aside, the rest of the ical documents have been around long enough and
had enough implementations that it is time to review and amend them
all. Accordingly, Bob Morgan has volunteered to draft a new charter
for the WG, and Ned Freed and Nathaniel Borenstein have both
volunteered to work on that next round of document revisions.
Very good!
When may the new charter be available?
I look forward to your comments on these proposals. -- Nathaniel
I feel that these proposals are very positive and that hopefully we
can finally have a last call for CAP.
I would also like to add, if it is not already implicit in the above
proposals, that the list, i.e., the new chair(s), should try to call a
consensus on issues as soon as it is appropriate. Too often in the past,
we have spent much time discussing issues or even agreeing on solutions,
only to have the discussion die down without a consensus. Later the same
issue would pop up again on the list, and we would often rehash the same
discussion. Moreover, it will allow us to close issues and move on to
other ones.
George