IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie> Mon, 03 December 2012 14:29 UTC

Return-Path: <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
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 93A0921F872C for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 3 Dec 2012 06:29:10 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.53
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.53 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.069, 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 C7to3rUnpcSq for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 3 Dec 2012 06:29:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [134.226.56.6]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA77E21F8705 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 3 Dec 2012 06:29:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1BDE4BE38; Mon, 3 Dec 2012 14:28:47 +0000 (GMT)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at scss.tcd.ie
Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id J4oiZuepaFdI; Mon, 3 Dec 2012 14:28:46 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from [IPv6:2001:770:10:203:60a5:f3d6:2e7e:4b] (unknown [IPv6:2001:770:10:203:60a5:f3d6:2e7e:4b]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7D2E1BE33; Mon, 3 Dec 2012 14:28:46 +0000 (GMT)
Message-ID: <50BCB71F.4060205@cs.tcd.ie>
Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2012 14:28:47 +0000
From: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/17.0 Thunderbird/17.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>
Subject: Re: Idea for a process experiment to reward running code...
References: <50BA64AB.3010106@cs.tcd.ie> <50BC5DA0.2030506@cisco.com> <50BC839A.1070503@cs.tcd.ie> <CAC4RtVBr_0x6NcKJ4OQO=GH4msuXxZ1W_ECW57-3FZAirWTzmw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAC4RtVBr_0x6NcKJ4OQO=GH4msuXxZ1W_ECW57-3FZAirWTzmw@mail.gmail.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.4.6
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: 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 14:29:10 -0000

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.

v2.30.2 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status