Re: [Json] Nudging the English-language vs. formalisms discussion forward

[Tim Bray <[e-mail]>]

For the record, I think the draft language is clear and correct and we
should move forward with it.


On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 7:31 AM, Paul Hoffman <[e-mail]> wrote:

> [[ Phill is the only one who has responded with a proposal to speak.
> Hearing whether others want to would be useful. --Paul Hoffman ]]
>
> It's been a week, and yet I can't imagine that everything has been said
> with respect to our proposed charter item that now stands at:
>
>   A set of natural-language terms and/or phrases for use in future
> specifications
>   that use JSON. This explicitly excludes schema languages and similar
> formalisms.
>
> After that, a bunch of people started talking about formalisms and actual
> schemas again. In order to get this decided, we need more discussion and
> then agreement. To that end, and to put our 90 minutes on Friday afternoon
> in London to best use, I will ask for at least three people to present
> their views in 10-minute presentations at the meeting. However, in order to
> cause this to not be the normal IETF "let's wait for the meeting" game, the
> presentations need to be done by next Monday, Feb. 24. That gives people on
> the list a preview of what will be said, time to argue about it, and time
> for the presenters to hone their slides if they want.
>
> Let me know online or offline if you want to do a presentation. If you're
> not going to be at the meeting but want to say something, you need to find
> some like-minded soul with whom to work on the presentation.
>
> --Paul Hoffman
> _______________________________________________
> json mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/json
>
> _______________________________________________
> json mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/json
>