Re: Running Code

[[e-mail]]

> I assumed that acknowledgement would be a good enough incentive for
> developers to contribute early implementations, but you seem to
> think that there would be other reasons.  The fact is that feedback
> from early implementations is rare,

THat may be true in your neck of the woods, but not in mine. I try and do at
least a preliminary implementation for every specification I write (the notable
exception for me on this was RFC 2231, and boy do I wish I had done one in that
case), and I routinely receive notes from other implementors saying they've
iimplemented some draft of mine long before publication or even WG last call.

> so what other reasons do you
> think early implementers would have?  Cannot be money - early
> implementations are very likely to become obsolete at the next
> version of the I-D, and so have to be rewritten.

Again, if there's a problem with people not getting proper recognition for
having contributed to a specification, irrespective of whether that
contribution is based on implementation work or just reading the specification,
that needs to be addressed independently of this proposal. It is wrong to take
credit for someone else's work.

				Ned