Re: [Json] Quick note / People coming to Berlin?

[Pete Resnick <[e-mail]>]

Speaking again as AD:

On 7/3/13 2:57 PM, John Cowan wrote:

> Pete Resnick scripsit:
>
>    
>> The running discussion over the past 24 hours has been a bit intense
>> for me to catch up on. I'm hoping to send a message by EOB today
>> with some thoughts.

The chairs and I chatted. I think there's quite a bit of "two ships 
passing in the night" discussion that's going on here on the list, with 
people thinking they are disagreeing but are simply not speaking the 
"same language". I'm working on a series of questions that should 
hopefully clarify where we are on some issues and maybe (just *maybe*) 
lead to consensus. I'm already seeing some movement on the duplicate 
names front that I think will result in a good outcome.

I doubt I'll get to posting my questions tonight, but I'll try to get 
that done over the weekend. As the book says, "Don't panic!"

>> I do not think all hope is lost on doing what
>> this group was chartered to do.
>>      
> Well, one of the chairs has said (albeit while hatless[1]), that the
> charter is self-contradictory.  While that may not be the voice of the god
> "coming to tell of doom in words like beaten bronze"[2], it's certainly
> not encouraging.
>    

Your humble AD disagrees with the assessment that the charter is somehow 
self-contradictory. I think it is quite plausible to believe that we can 
correct "errors and inconsistencies", but "keep changes to a minimum", 
even when it comes to the string issue. Even if we have to put in a 
significant block of explanatory text in order to do that, I don't think 
we will have violated the dictate of making "minimal changes". And I 
still think that is a plausible outcome.

Stay tuned. Remain calm.

pr

-- 
Pete Resnick<http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/>
Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. - [phone]