At 06:07 a.m. 03/12/2008, Lars Eggert wrote:
I have produced a separate PDF document with such a discussion, and
have provided a pointer to it in the Introduction. Please let me know
if you think this addresses the issue you raised.
WG: Is this okay with the working group, or is any other approach
preferred rather than the one I hve taken to adderss David's comments?
Quick follow-up: I have suggested to Fernando the alternative of
including a short section of text on just this issue in the document
itself, instead of referencing a PDF that includes a lot of other test
(the PDF is basically what used to be appendix A, which was removed
based on WG feedback). But that is also not aligned with prior WG
consensus, since it would move some text back that we had removed.
Basically, David's comment is asking for some text that WG consensus
had removed from the document, and we need to come to an agreement on
whether we want to revisit this consensus and add some text or point
to another document, or if we want to tell David that he's on the
rough side of the consensus.
FWIW, my personal take is that adding a reference to that PDF can
address David's comments without having to add text back to the I-D.
Kind regards,
--
Fernando Gont
e-mail: fernando@xxxxxxxxxxx || fgont@xxxxxxx
PGP Fingerprint: 7809 84F5 322E 45C7 F1C9 3945 96EE A9EF D076 FFF1
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf