[rtcweb] Format for Straw poll objections

Ted Hardie <ted.ietf@gmail.com> Mon, 09 December 2013 23:01 UTC

Return-Path: <ted.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B5931ACC7D for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 9 Dec 2013 15:01:31 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, 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 R3eS7oaq-rCh for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 9 Dec 2013 15:01:29 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-ie0-x22c.google.com (mail-ie0-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c03::22c]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A6571A8028 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Mon, 9 Dec 2013 15:01:29 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-ie0-f172.google.com with SMTP id qd12so7434371ieb.3 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Mon, 09 Dec 2013 15:01:24 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=k/m34d3WMiGmyilyvYlYUpb28gMZO4Rz17fKDeckT74=; b=rVYim7a8wFurGA5FglJSUoZIFxWqI/dUm5ptixJOiJzn7K19qO8RcAbrdEfC+8bll/ FhRe/eYcs2typF6TffWCmF1TLYJ06ti48DghncPFbnaafioQ5UDLXlz4MNKIVO4965A1 Qet/JOwOv2p0iozdhmNAPqud8gFdAB/kRdeGBvlIs4kbc45rlmWSreztknDkPfl2r81n BZ2F9cBACv4oVVpRfJYx2O8Oblc3ADQigLHFucGk33DZh8SPMHCL7GJTovlCz0cWqYYf B0tyaRofigqNB2mG9zgP2QEegO3brHZBS2rJJ/nwUKbc9yVvJkCvaDIX9u04/3NpFQgJ IvyQ==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.50.122.38 with SMTP id lp6mr17576049igb.30.1386630084407; Mon, 09 Dec 2013 15:01:24 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.43.104.130 with HTTP; Mon, 9 Dec 2013 15:01:24 -0800 (PST)
Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2013 15:01:24 -0800
Message-ID: <CA+9kkMBAv1Wp3wBGuXH4edr2LDL_cRdZrC9OdQnYPJyvFH_WdA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Ted Hardie <ted.ietf@gmail.com>
To: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="089e015383609dba8804ed21f972"
Subject: [rtcweb] Format for Straw poll objections
X-BeenThere: rtcweb@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Real-Time Communication in WEB-browsers working group list <rtcweb.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/rtcweb>, <mailto:rtcweb-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rtcweb/>
List-Post: <mailto:rtcweb@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rtcweb-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb>, <mailto:rtcweb-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2013 23:01:31 -0000

Thanks to Adam for putting his responses out so quickly.  In reviewing it,
I note that when he has similar objections to related proposals, he says
things like:

> 7.  There is no MTI video codec
>         a. Are you in favor of this option [Yes/No/Acceptable]:

No

>         b. Do you have any objections to this option, if so please
>            summarize them:

Yes; see 5b, above.


To tabulate the straw poll, the chairs are going to have to put each of the
responses in a spreadsheet and then link the objections to the same
alternative.  While we can cut and paste
objections as this suggests, if folks could actually be verbose and
re-iterate their objections,
it removes a potential source of operator error.

thanks,

Ted