IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Idea for a process experiment to reward running code...

Elwyn Davies <elwynd@dial.pipex.com> Mon, 03 December 2012 14:42 UTC

Return-Path: <elwynd@dial.pipex.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE87621F86C3 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 3 Dec 2012 06:42:10 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id VdHSXKNYlm0K for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 3 Dec 2012 06:42:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: from auth.a.painless.aa.net.uk (a.painless.aa.net.uk [IPv6:2001:8b0:0:30::51bb:1e33]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 769FB21F8475 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 3 Dec 2012 06:42:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mightyatom.folly.org.uk ([81.187.254.250]) by a.painless.aa.net.uk with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from <elwynd@dial.pipex.com>) id 1TfXDf-0000We-5a; Mon, 03 Dec 2012 14:42:06 +0000
Subject: Re: Idea for a process experiment to reward running code...
From: Elwyn Davies <elwynd@dial.pipex.com>
To: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
In-Reply-To: <50BCB71F.4060205@cs.tcd.ie>
References: <50BA64AB.3010106@cs.tcd.ie> <50BC5DA0.2030506@cisco.com> <50BC839A.1070503@cs.tcd.ie> <CAC4RtVBr_0x6NcKJ4OQO=GH4msuXxZ1W_ECW57-3FZAirWTzmw@mail.gmail.com> <50BCB71F.4060205@cs.tcd.ie>
Content-Type: text/plain
Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2012 14:42:13 +0000
Message-Id: <1354545733.11916.746.camel@mightyatom>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Evolution 2.26.3
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Spam-Score-a.painless.aa.net.uk: -4.0
Cc: Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>, IETF-Discussion <ietf@ietf.org>, Stewart Bryant <stbryant@cisco.com>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2012 14:42:11 -0000

On Mon, 2012-12-03 at 14:28 +0000, Stephen Farrell wrote:
> 
> On 12/03/2012 02:25 PM, Barry Leiba wrote:
> > Running code, when it's an organic part of the document development,
> > is undoubtedly a good thing -- it doesn't make everything right, but,
> > yes, it does do *some* spec validation and probably does help spec
> > quality.
> 
> Fully agree. And this kind of experiment may encourage that
> good thing some more. Or not. We'll not see if we don't try.
> We may see if we do try. I think its worth trying. (That's
> fairly obvious I guess:-)
> 
> S.

Another thing which it might help with is weeding out gratuitous
proliferation of options.

Regards,
Elwyn

v2.28.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status