IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [apps-discuss] Last Call: <draft-ietf-appsawg-json-pointer-07.txt> (JSON Pointer) to Proposed Standard

Robert Sayre <sayrer@gmail.com> Sun, 06 January 2013 12:09 UTC

Return-Path: <sayrer@gmail.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 447C421F8788 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 6 Jan 2013 04:09:13 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
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 sBCMGbKI2B2K for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 6 Jan 2013 04:09:12 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-we0-f181.google.com (mail-we0-f181.google.com [74.125.82.181]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E7E121F8778 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sun, 6 Jan 2013 04:09:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-we0-f181.google.com with SMTP id t11so8846895wey.26 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sun, 06 Jan 2013 04:09:11 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=sSQ/1BsCJEFXefeYrYoAhrSWoKsezj0YZWurytYQky0=; b=QQWFfBdZ1DWgpbe3RYf4AFP6NuS9Kb3PWXaZfT9f8sazYX+Asd8qM/XeV2pk10jaJk JkK8JzllNV8/n7qlSlsINcCJRMDCPH0UEia+tJHSNyuqs+DNHRyiMObVWqxYkBVNqw9R qaawe2Hp3npj4G6IoJB/zHky7yPS7wxPEIlUVivhJ87fMZ+YB+kseAwnqNU60sZhRw3P QMZfTP8ejzMr0/hJmJJ7lUckUM355myqwpZ07BGY0ZBpzgeG2CAS2LibFxzJZym2FOTA y4Y1NmFlIngsrH6QngqFh3gMO5OLyKU05aEoBAr+lB763zUF3ogIFELv7I7YlYiuB2f+ 99Fg==
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.180.73.80 with SMTP id j16mr4844285wiv.5.1357474151160; Sun, 06 Jan 2013 04:09:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.194.1.101 with HTTP; Sun, 6 Jan 2013 04:09:11 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CADnDZ896FUhWJQyGVu54tv=hvC5FZDxKMowhdxk0GM1C9LrrNw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CADnDZ896FUhWJQyGVu54tv=hvC5FZDxKMowhdxk0GM1C9LrrNw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 06 Jan 2013 04:09:11 -0800
Message-ID: <CAChr6SxibLyp1WBskouGEH6G8ki_xt=7fex3Wg_6z8DExP89Kw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] Last Call: <draft-ietf-appsawg-json-pointer-07.txt> (JSON Pointer) to Proposed Standard
From: Robert Sayre <sayrer@gmail.com>
To: Abdussalam Baryun <abdussalambaryun@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Cc: mnot@mnot.net, ietf <ietf@ietf.org>
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: Sun, 06 Jan 2013 12:09:13 -0000

On Sun, Jan 6, 2013 at 12:59 AM, Abdussalam Baryun
<abdussalambaryun@gmail.com> wrote:
>>Yes, you've brought that to our attention several times. If you wanted this spec to align with your software, it would have been much easier if you'd got involved before Last Call.
>
> Why is it called <Last Call> if we don't accept any new input (e.g.,
> draft-ietf-appsawg-json-pointer-07) . Why do we call RFC <Request For
> Comment> if we don't want people to comment on (e.g. RFC2119).
>
> We SHOULD discuss any input any time, thank the participant, and
> accept only consensus on each input at any phase of time.

This is true, and a timing objection is a pretty low-quality response
to a substantive issue. This particular timing objection is also
somewhat misleading, since it looks like more than one person provided
this feedback prior to IETF Last Call without receiving a response:
<http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-discuss/current/msg08531.html>.
My message on the matter was sent on December 3rd, 2012.

- Rob

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email