Re: [hybi] Ticket#1 Http Compliance

I think that Anne's question is a reasonable one to ask.  We need consensus before we can agree that we need requirements. 

I for one disagree with Anne.  We've been operating without a basic set of ground rules and it's lead to long debates that don't resolve.  Setting expectations is costly, but it seems less costly than the sorts of bickering that follows when there are no agreed rules.

It seems that we've been pre-empted though.  The chairs have called consensus on the topic already - we have a requirements document as a WG item.

--Martin

> -----Original Message-----
> From: hybi-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:hybi-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
> Greg Wilkins
> Sent: Thursday, 13 May 2010 10:33 PM
> To: hybi@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [hybi] Ticket#1 Http Compliance
> 
> Anne van Kesteren wrote:
> 
> > I don't believe that shifting the debate to discussing requirements
> > instead is a good idea. To me it makes everything less concrete and
> far
> > more vague as to what the intentions are of people proposing the
> > requirements. We don't necessarily need to have a (lack of a)
> > requirement to do what you say. We could just make a WG decision.
> 
> 
> Anne,
> 
> Is it a requirement to have a requirements document?
> 
> I'm afraid that is too meta-physical for me.  I've been asked
> to edit the requirements document as part of the IETF process
> and that's what I'm attempting to do.
> 
> regards
> 
> _______________________________________________
> hybi mailing list
> hybi@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hybi