[ogpx] VWRAP Status

[Joshua Bell <[e-mail]>]

Now that we have consensus to bludgeon the policy conversation further only
in private email for a while, how about a quick status check?

Meetings:

The next IETF meeting, IETF76, is coming up in a little under a month. In
discussion among the co-chairs, area directors, and current slate of draft
authors, we didn't feel that there were enough outstanding issues requiring
a face-to-face meeting this soon after chartering the group. Given that
other WGs needed time on the schedule, we've opted not to have a WG meeting
this time. We expect to have plenty of issues that will benefit from
face-to-face meetings (with mixed-reality components!) for the next several
sessions.

Should any issues arise which require broad working group input and cannot
be resolved on the mailing list prior to the next session,
http://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/interim-meetings.html provide guidance on
structuring such meetings. Again, at this point, the mailing list (and
off-list pair-wise conversations) appear to be working sufficiently.

Drafts:

The charter calls out the goal of having the LLSD ('Abstract Type System for
the Transmission of Dynamic Structured Data' - draft-hamrick-llsd-00) and
Intro ('Introduction and Goals' - draft-hamrick-ogp-intro-00) drafts
finished up and submitted by February 2010.

Could the author of those drafts (that'd be you, Meadhbh) and the authors of
other drafts referenced in the charter (Meadhbh/Infinity, David/Zha,
Mark/Zero) comment for the group on the status of those drafts, what parts
are under active work, when the next revisions should be expected, and what
feedback and inputs are desired from group members at this time?

Are any additional drafts being considered at this time by group members?

Note that if anyone submits a new (-00) draft that they hope to have adopted
by the working group, they should name it "draft-MYNAME-vwrap-OTHER-STUFF".
That makes the tracking tools work better.  The WG tools page (
http://tools.ietf.org/wg/vwrap/) will show them as related drafts, and
if/when they become "draft-ietf-vwrap-OTHER-STUFF", the tools will
understand that the WG version replaces the individual one.

Thanks,

Joshua (w/ input from Barry)