Re: [vwrap] Moving ahead with draft-ietf-vwrap-intro

[Meadhbh Hamrick <[e-mail]>]

to quote a famous footware company's ads: "just do it!"

please feel free to rewrite sections or just point out where you think
the language is improper or could be improved.

we _are_ trying to move this document along in the process, so sooner
is better than later.

i think we're hoping to have a document that reflects consensus, while
at the same time constrains the problem domain somewhat. so, i think
clarifying use cases or terminology would be readily welcomed.
proposing we rebuild the whole infrastructure will result in
quarrelsome quibbling. i'm guessing you're not proposing something so
radical, so go for it!

public comment and ideas for how to improve the specs are part of what
we're trying to do on this list.

-cheers
-meadhbh
--
meadhbh hamrick * it's pronounced "maeve"
@OhMeadhbh * http://meadhbh.org/ * [e-mail]



On Mon, Aug 2, 2010 at 10:50 AM, Jon Freedman <[e-mail]> wrote:
> Hello Everyone,
>
> I want to throw in my two pieces of abstract virtual world currency into the
> mix. After perusing the vwrap-intro draft in depth, I have a few comments. I
> realize that some of this may have been raised before in previous
> discussions.
>
> The overall document and standardization roadmap makes is great. The
> technology and specifications laid out are generic enough that they should
> be able to encompass many forms of virtual worlds and the applications which
> inevitably evolve upon stable platforms. In my humble opinion the
> requirement of HTTP/REST semantics and suggestion for the use of XMPP as a
> messaging protocol are great to see.
>
> On the surface, the draft supports multiple means of deploying a virtual
> world. This ranges from local development environments to large
> distributed/scalable grids. Everyone seems to agree that support of multiple
> models is important, and I feel that this document does address that need.
> My only concern in this area is highly related to my overall concern with
> the document as it currently stands.
>
> I am wondering if it acceptable for me to give the document a quick overall
> pass to help improve some of the language use ? I realize this is a draft so
> hopefully this is a good time for such endeavours. Many sections lack
> clarity and multiple virtual world colloquialisms are used. Assuming there
> are no issues, I will send a txt version of my edits to this list within a
> few days.
>
> Cheers,
>
> --
> Jonathan Freedman
> President
> Open Metaverse Foundation
> [phone]
>
> --
> Jonathan Freedman
> President
> Open Metaverse Foundation
> [phone]
>
> _______________________________________________
> vwrap mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/vwrap
>
>