Re: [tap] RFC Status?

Andrew de Andrade <> Wed, 13 August 2014 18:05 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id CDA1A1A03CD for <>; Wed, 13 Aug 2014 11:05:08 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.701
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.701 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_40=-0.001, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_NEUTRAL=0.779] autolearn=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id P3g44ZlfKz7j for <>; Wed, 13 Aug 2014 11:05:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 445DF1A03BC for <>; Wed, 13 Aug 2014 11:05:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id l6so105995qcy.19 for <>; Wed, 13 Aug 2014 11:05:00 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=71yGQewsQr+tVvUPF/dagOYvRR/OsmGxAm4MpLKTtn0=; b=bZ1anUNyvs7RAlnhwXFYeGnHGm9gkijwjETE+NPelSAq50fMWFvT67aqb1feQmESIf nJYxFIEdbx7BYnFYAnl0D7ufnqYZgJu159fd/DCaFI6jOiLRe43TDyFhitIZu84dBkMW ShERlYBM8iMgJdFKaazXvvSClvxoXLZJQFPlyKYOec11oZXV0/Fdrwozz2tOkAaR6JW6 58vPY0qimZQ6MdNF6UqzNEHeqppD3UmcMQl6Sg77bC0ZWJCVMB4VXA1d+n56C7Zn82H6 84UCDrLhXJt2dbngtPmJZCHxG7LO95gT60JCBbzL+a1b84oHKNkyR5UQFn+sihqgrxoG 3UQw==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQn52+rrGp5Wk+Uxbc1bq7K7VstilICLlYsSgP5wPo3KoM/192Ox9aOA1GY+eUtJ12qusoHN
X-Received: by with SMTP id 5mr9609522qar.25.1407953099983; Wed, 13 Aug 2014 11:04:59 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by with HTTP; Wed, 13 Aug 2014 11:04:39 -0700 (PDT)
X-Originating-IP: []
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <> <> <> <> <> <>
From: Andrew de Andrade <>
Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2014 11:04:39 -0700
Message-ID: <>
To: Jonathan Kingston <>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c2210862f77e050086a089
Cc: "" <>
Subject: Re: [tap] RFC Status?
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Test Anything Protocol WG discussions <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2014 18:05:09 -0000

On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 1:47 PM, Jonathan Kingston <>
> The most conversation was there about the JSON / TAP/Y work:
I will take a look at the others. I'm also going to go through the web
archived wiki pages and move them to the TestAnything github org.

I was about to say that "right now there is one repo. I'm wondering if it
is best to have two repos, once with the spec and specification discussions
and one strictly for the website." and then I went to check out
TestAnything and saw that you already took care of that. I'll try to move
the original wiki pages over to TestAnything/Specification and start one
issue for each of the proposed ideas so that the discussion can take place

I have seen a lot of conversation on other lists but I will have to dig out
> where they were, I think there was talk on

I'll try to some searching through the issue archives and see what I can
find. Let me know if there are any other places worth looking at.

> The issue as I see it is the ability for robust meta data with and agreed
> set of parameters and meanings. TAP/Y(
> has gone
> some way towards addressing these however not far enough in clearing up the
> format.

Will investigate.

> There is smaller amounts of things that need merging in but most are
> conversations, the issue realistically is that I'm not the authority so it
> need people to vote and comment on them. So on the issue above I can add my
> comments and merge it in but realistically it is so much of a change that I
> don't think it is fair for me to just merge it in.

Usually it's not even about being an authority, but recognizing where there
are strong differences of opinion and knowing how to polling a few of those
people who are authorities because they actually coded implementations
implementations and therefore know the pitfalls and the complaints and
desires of those using their code.

> I am happy to be a gate keeper of the changes of the site as realistically
> its not going to change at a rapid pace, however I am looking to the
> community to contribute to the issues and out of that perhaps I can get
> more moderators on side.

Sounds good. Any pressing changes that people really want to see can just
be submitted as pull requests.

> I have created a new repo(
> for TAP which can be used to track changes better, conversations and also
> building TAP 14 separate to the site itself which I see as a published
> authority.

Awesome. As I said, I'll move the old wiki content to the the wiki for this