From: Erland Sommarskog (sommar@algonet.se)
Date: Tue Aug 29 2000 - 03:18:21 CDT
Jonathan Grobe <grobe@netins.net> writes:
> I haven't heard from our chair for a long time. Does he still read
> the list?
What would there be to read? It has been silent here...
> It's clear that this list is not going to achieve any major
> breakthroughs; in fact the list has completely run out of steam.
>
> I think our editor should just drop any of the controversial stuff
> from the draft, tidy up any unfinished details, send it out to the list
> for one last glance and then send it off to the appropriate people
> for action.
I would tend to agree. In fact, I have been playing with the thought
of sending out a message like Johathan's, but I haven't come around
to it.
I'm more and more leaning to that our work should be in two steps.
First get just a brushed-up 1036 out of the door. Basically what
we have now, probably with Replaces/Supersedes dropped, as its
implementability has been questioned. Other novelties such as mvgroup,
the new Path header can probably stay in. From my perspective the
most important item is UTF-8, so it should definitly stay in. Or
to put it even more bluntly: the issue on charsets is so pressing,
so it warrants a release on its own.
Then in step two we could approach complicated things such as
signed headers, cancel-locks and other issue. Yes, I reckon that
authentication of articles is about as pressing as UTF-8, but
we are obviously far from being able to deliver, as there is no
existing practice to lean on.
If there are anymore features to be added in step one, it's headers
for specifying complaint addresses.
-- Erland Sommarskog, Stockholm, sommar@algonet.se