IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [hybi] Process, was: Technical feedback. was: Process!

Justin Erenkrantz <justin@erenkrantz.com> Sun, 31 January 2010 00:03 UTC

Return-Path: <justin.erenkrantz@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: hybi@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: hybi@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4AEE93A6828 for <hybi@core3.amsl.com>; Sat, 30 Jan 2010 16:03:26 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.017
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.017 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.040, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id YYMEyvA+udhA for <hybi@core3.amsl.com>; Sat, 30 Jan 2010 16:03:25 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-gx0-f226.google.com (mail-gx0-f226.google.com [209.85.217.226]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A0623A6782 for <hybi@ietf.org>; Sat, 30 Jan 2010 16:03:25 -0800 (PST)
Received: by gxk26 with SMTP id 26so1370474gxk.8 for <hybi@ietf.org>; Sat, 30 Jan 2010 16:03:53 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:sender:received:in-reply-to :references:date:x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc :content-type; bh=kberTQCKiI+DWU2c2iJI4HVMfJv8b0IIvp6Co1M7zEg=; b=Ntyl/BtKHdQ1+W+2PG4QwOfLJhoMXtErpKVQUzA1Ujjbpzma42pQPMO++a9ekinbH5 Gjx/hGjRqeecXvclYVwdgay/Pvxq0JVkH5gBsKkPo2kCFVNpCOPc4txQ01d6COB+MZ2O A06G87yr2QGHF5IO9gOGuVwTsb1nWEVlj4izc=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; b=RvSYlrFgtGqH7cV8oEsNY93Lz/t5OJvQ4usTWmA0BhtC4uhlIFcaQKNaQuAdsCs0lh u9PJdGfz7ulah9yD1kkhvzk30w510t8uUzCVxd79cky7wBdNzzY5sNqrzlhjWRX1X2so Wqmn7OaWugnat+RkUG5XPBmD6PvcF+Jxx/JKg=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: justin.erenkrantz@gmail.com
Received: by 10.91.19.27 with SMTP id w27mr2326341agi.118.1264896232362; Sat, 30 Jan 2010 16:03:52 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <4B64BB99.8030906@webtide.com>
References: <de17d48e1001280012i2657b587i83cda30f50013e6b@mail.gmail.com> <4B62C5FE.8090904@it.aoyama.ac.jp> <Pine.LNX.4.64.1001291134350.22020@ps20323.dreamhostps.com> <4B62E516.2010003@webtide.com> <5c902b9e1001290756r3f585204h32cacd6e64fbebaa@mail.gmail.com> <4B636757.3040307@webtide.com> <BBF3CE06-3276-4A7C-8961-7B3DDEE406D0@apple.com> <4B63DC2D.4090702@webtide.com> <4678E38C-EBD3-4867-B3A6-53A60F7F26C0@apple.com> <4B64BB99.8030906@webtide.com>
Date: Sat, 30 Jan 2010 16:03:52 -0800
X-Google-Sender-Auth: 2830da45c89189ac
Message-ID: <5c902b9e1001301603y6a13f98fla8ce7a9f0c72a914@mail.gmail.com>
From: Justin Erenkrantz <justin@erenkrantz.com>
To: Greg Wilkins <gregw@webtide.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Cc: Hybi <hybi@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [hybi] Process, was: Technical feedback. was: Process!
X-BeenThere: hybi@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Server-Initiated HTTP <hybi.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hybi>, <mailto:hybi-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/hybi>
List-Post: <mailto:hybi@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:hybi-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hybi>, <mailto:hybi-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 31 Jan 2010 00:03:26 -0000

On Sat, Jan 30, 2010 at 3:07 PM, Greg Wilkins <gregw@webtide.com> wrote:
> I repeat my suggestion that the WHATWG continue to edit the current document
> to produce an interoperable and deployed 1.0, while the IETF begins the process
> to produce a new document describing a 1.1 version of the protocol.

If I could make a humble suggestion, perhaps it makes sense to have
WHATWG produce a 0.9 version based on Hixie's latest draft or whatnot.
 This is akin to what happened with HTTP...

I just feel that if the IETF-governed protocol takes into account
real-world feedback from non-browser devs, that the protocol may look
different enough that a 1.0->1.1 won't be significant enough to
reflect the differences.

My $.02.  -- justin

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email