IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Json] Call for WG Consensus on Whether or Not to Adopt Nomenclature Document(s) in the Charter

Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net> Sat, 15 March 2014 13:48 UTC

Return-Path: <derhoermi@gmx.net>
X-Original-To: json@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: json@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7706B1A0146 for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 15 Mar 2014 06:48:33 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.447
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.447 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.547, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id o08ViInsDXtn for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 15 Mar 2014 06:48:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.17.20]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9DF4A1A0142 for <json@ietf.org>; Sat, 15 Mar 2014 06:48:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from netb ([89.204.139.147]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx102) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0LeBPM-1Wuryb48Ro-00prcY; Sat, 15 Mar 2014 14:48:22 +0100
From: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
To: Matt Miller <mamille2@cisco.com>
Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2014 14:48:16 +0100
Message-ID: <4em8i99ijbnaig72kub8ks43k83vp9e4al@hive.bjoern.hoehrmann.de>
References: <53238F2E.5010105@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <53238F2E.5010105@cisco.com>
X-Mailer: Forte Agent 3.3/32.846
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:3WRCBjvZ6y/bLRJuq22UauHQNAMSVPFjuASa0KwkD5oZUAHg3u2 zNyxwgYrWM4x3/Lz+6k3xLEffdV5WhA/Es9y0+ffJ3OVmtUzfPRAziN/sB66DQx/4XPiFaE uCAyg3tmR9oj4OlCWQC2+F/X2x0xQRbD5LNaeo5SHdxnK5hAU9e139Ks08t1HodOvr8veyO 8VUZQxvJvuSJb13zJl+Ow==
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/json/ghbcmKKe6wKU_YiCHlOI5VQHLq0
Cc: IETF JSON WG <json@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Json] Call for WG Consensus on Whether or Not to Adopt Nomenclature Document(s) in the Charter
X-BeenThere: json@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "JavaScript Object Notation \(JSON\) WG mailing list" <json.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/json>, <mailto:json-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/json/>
List-Post: <mailto:json@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:json-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/json>, <mailto:json-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2014 13:48:33 -0000

* Matt Miller wrote:
>Please speak up whether or not you believe our charter should be amended
>to include a work item that would adopt one or more nomenclature /
>schema / description documents.

There are various efforts in the area and they do not seem to need an
IETF WG at this moment.
-- 
Björn Höhrmann · mailto:bjoern@hoehrmann.de · http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de
Am Badedeich 7 · Telefon: +49(0)160/4415681 · http://www.bjoernsworld.de
25899 Dagebüll · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.websitedev.de/

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email