Re: [newprep] WG Review: Stringprep after IDNA2008 WG (newprep)

[Marc Blanchet <[e-mail]>]

Le 10-05-19 09:40, Peter Saint-Andre a écrit :
> On 5/18/10 12:32 PM, Marc Blanchet wrote:
>> Le 10-05-18 14:27, Sam Hartman a écrit :
>>>>>>>> "Marc" == Marc Blanchet<[e-mail]>   writes:
>>>
>>>       Marc>   we had a discussion about the same subject: i.e. should we
>>>       Marc>   restrict the scope to a specific set of documents to
>>>       Marc>   review/update/... or do we keep some provision for other
>>>       Marc>   documents coming in the stream that require "help" of the
>>>       Marc>   newprep. I was arguing for the latter. To me, what you are
>>>       Marc>   talking about is the latter. Obviously, some people wanted
>>> the
>>>       Marc>   charter to be restrictive in order to not go all over the
>>>       Marc>   place, and I agree in principle... However, this work is
>>> kinda
>>>       Marc>   horizontal: touches many areas, so having a more large
>>> view of
>>>       Marc>   the problem space and documents that depends on this newprep
>>>       Marc>   work would be very valuable to the working group
>>>       Marc>   work. Therefore, I'm more for opening a bit the charter for
>>>       Marc>   the cases like the ones you are talking about.
>>>
>>> I'm happy with a restrictive charter so long as the work areas
>>> identified today (including mine) are included.
>>
>> my guess is that we most likely will discover other issues/newprep
>> potential "customers" as we go, that it might be useful to work on,
>> since they have a lot of similarities with the others official in the
>> charter.
>
> Agreed.
>
>> therefore, more "opened" than closed charter.
>
> We're trying to balance two things here: (1) we want to get as much
> input as possible from current and potential customers of stringprep or
> newprep/stringprepbis/whatever, but (2) we want to scope the WG tightly
> enough that it doesn't have a mandate to work on "anything related to
> internationalized strings".

agreed.

>
>>> I'm happy drawing a
>>> line in the sand and saying "here's what we'll touch first," so long as
>>> people who bring up items now get included.  I'd probably be happier
>>> with a reasonably open charter.
>>>
>>> I'm not at all happy if the items I bring up or other similar items
>>> brought up now are excluded.
>
> In an email exchange with Marc and Alexey Melnikov last week, I proposed
> adding the following paragraph to the charter:
>
>     Although the group may provide advice regarding other technologies,
>     it will prioritize work on the above-listed stringprep profiles and
>     will take on additional tasks as official milestones only after
>     rechartering.
>
> We might want to broaden that a bit further to explicitly mention
> seeking feedback from customers other than the existing stringprep profiles:
>
>     Although the group will seek input from and may provide advice to
>     "customers" working on other technologies, it will prioritize work
>     on the above-listed stringprep profiles and will take on additional
>     tasks as official milestones only after rechartering.
>

fine by me.


Marc.

> Peter
>


-- 
=========
IPv6 book: Migrating to IPv6, Wiley. http://www.ipv6book.ca
Stun/Turn server for VoIP NAT-FW traversal: http://numb.viagenie.ca
DTN news service: http://reeves.viagenie.ca
NAT64-DNS64 Opensource: http://ecdysis.viagenie.ca