On Jan 19, 2007, at 1:03 PM, Julian Reschke wrote:
Cullen,
I was tempted to finish that mail with "and thanks for the fish",
in honor of Douglas Adams, but I resisted.
lol :-)
Anyway, please understand that I don't want to make your or Ted's
life harder than it needs to be. I just feel that the document is
not good.
I know you are not trying to make anyones life hard and you are just
trying to get this document to be right. I agree with you that the
document has many problems and could be much better. I think that is
important that you say it is not good if that is what you feel.
However, I do think that it is better than rfc2518 and I am totally
convinced given the last 18 months that this WG is not capable of
making significant advances to this document. Perhaps I am just the
wrong person and the folks in this WG are just too burned out to
drive more forward progress on this document. I hope someone does try
to do something better than this draft, but given where we are today,
I think we should publish this while waiting for the next thing.
.
I'd also *really* like to understand why it seems to me that some
voices on the mailing list are taken more seriously than others,
or, for that matter, why anonymous feedback during the IETF Last
Call obviously is more seriously considered than all the feedback
that *did* arrive on the mailing list.
The working group takes some people more seriously than others. For
example, if you say "that will break several existing
implementation," most people in the WG believe that much more than if
I said it". That's good - you have much ore experience with the
deployed system and it is typical for a WG to have some leaders that
others look to for their advice and opinions. Ten seconds of looking
at the archives will convince anyone that some people look to your
opinion. I'm sure I can't count the number of "I agree with Julian"
emails I have seen. However don't confuse that with what happens when
trying to judge consensus - as a chair in trying to judge consensus,
I do listen to everyone. The biggest problem in this WG is often so
few people comment on anything that even if they all agree it's such
a small fraction of the WG that it is hard to call it consensus.
So, again, thanks for the Sushi that I really enjoyed. Hopefully
you'll consider my work on the IMPP-vcard draft as sort of payback.
I'm very thankful for the work you did on IMPP-vcard. It was
something that I was never going to mange to finish. Likewise, don't
take the lack of ability to come to agreement on a much better
version of 2518bis to be reflective of everything that is happening
at IETF. This is basically the problem of a WG with so few people
willing to even review comments and it's too small to really
effectively function as a WG. You have a ton of expertise in XML,
DAV, schema and lots of other things that IETF is doing active work
in. Come to Prague and meet the people working on them and check out
some of the more vibrant and less frustrating work the Wbdav.
Best regards, Julian
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf