Re: [ogpx] ogpx Digest, Vol 10, Issue 17

Katherine Mancuso <kmancuso@gmail.com> Thu, 25 February 2010 06:26 UTC

DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:reply-to:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:content-type; b=loft8C8YtxVPPbwO1BXhTJNQ/3d+SinEEIMhoYC091g7o+iLR0sP4/udrm+LxSsN21 fBjjCMTDPinJLElTy7gbaofMa3sl8ZxnsrG2WqZXBCtlTHSqkrXtT6uhUZdCWETGBRzK ecT9zKAwSBNl4wLZBBBNC8OyJuImnLiOwkdDI=
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <mailman.130.1267041655.4546.ogpx@ietf.org>
References: <mailman.130.1267041655.4546.ogpx@ietf.org>
From: Katherine Mancuso <kmancuso@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2010 01:28:14 -0500
Message-ID: <adae2d8e1002242228y44a68affn226eb4b9d507afdc@mail.gmail.com>
To: ogpx@ietf.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Subject: Re: [ogpx] ogpx Digest, Vol 10, Issue 17
Precedence: list
Reply-To: kmancuso@gmail.com

Responding to Meadhbh's email:

"in other words, i have a big problem with using the ostensive
definition when describing vwrap service definitions. i don't want to
ever have a spec that says (and i paraphrase here) "readers are
referred to hypergrid specification 3.71 for how vwrap handles
authentication to an asset service and the legacy second life protocol
as defined in the beginning of file llagent.cpp from the snowglobe
source code"

agreed.

I believe that the best reason that we absolutely should not reference
other existing documents in this way is that technical protocols are
moving targets.  In many cases, the protocol/specification will be
altered rapidly; in other cases the practice based on that protocol
will become something we don't want.  On the other hand, I think it IS
okay and even good to have footnotes to fully explained protocols.

Forgive me if I fail exactly in the wording of my example here, I'm
trying to make a point:

VWRAP calls for bar and baz to handle authentication to an asset service (1).

1. Some other specifications we drew upon to make this include $bar
aspect of foo (version $foo, accessed on 2/27/10, available at
$archiveurl).  An example of an existing software deployment that is
similar to this specification is foo (version $, accessed on,
available at).

In short: footnotes and crediting of sources for developers interested
in going deeper into the antecedents of a particular aspect of the
specification and viewing examples are ABSOLUTELY good, since we want
to provide people the most material to work from when developing
implementations.  Making them the basis of our specification: BAD.

Katherine Mancuso / Muse Carmona

-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Katherine Mancuso: crusader of community art, social technology, & disability

Research:
Center for Assistive Technology & Environmental Access (http://www.catea.org)
Georgia Tech, Digital Media (http://dm.gatech.edu)

Community:
The Vesuvius Group: metaverse community builders
(http://www.thevesuviusgroup.com)
Gimp Girl Community Liaison/Research Fellow (http://www.gimpgirl.com)
Alternate ROOTS: arts*community*activism (http://www.alternateroots.org)
Students Working Against Negative Stereotypes of Autism, Georgia Tech.
(gtautism@gmail.com)

Contact in the web, the metaverse, the world:
http://twitter.com/musingvirtual
http://muse.dreamwidth.org
http://www.linkedin.com/in/kathymancuso
SL: Muse Carmona
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Re: [ogpx] ogpx Digest, Vol 10, Issue 17 Katherine Mancuso