Re: IPv7 Selection Criteria

[Dave Crocker <[e-mail]>]

Noel,

I think you have correctly identified the point of departure between 
our reactions to inclusion of the live-long-and-prosper criterion.

Mumble.

I tend to agree with you that a pronouncement from some august body is
unlikely to terminate all other efforts.  However, I note that there
continues to be a sentiment in favor of having an august body make such
a pronouncement.  Further, there remains sentiment towards continuing
the pattern of milestones and public review (where "review" pertains to
commentary about accomplishments and open issues, rather than to declaring
a "winner.)

In the hearts-and-minds battle, I agree that your favorite criterion is
essential to keep.  In the public-analysis battle, I think not.

Hence, let me suggest explicitly distinguishing those criteria that
have clinical benefit, but lack objective assessment, from those 
whose assessment can be made mechanical.  The clinical criteria could
be in their own section, some sort of qualification explaining why they
are included and how they should be used.

Whatcha tink?

Dave