On 5/18/10 12:32 PM, Marc Blanchet wrote: > Le 10-05-18 14:27, Sam Hartman a écrit : >>>>>>> "Marc" == Marc Blanchet<marc.blanchet@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes: >> >> Marc> we had a discussion about the same subject: i.e. should we >> Marc> restrict the scope to a specific set of documents to >> Marc> review/update/... or do we keep some provision for other >> Marc> documents coming in the stream that require "help" of the >> Marc> newprep. I was arguing for the latter. To me, what you are >> Marc> talking about is the latter. Obviously, some people wanted >> the >> Marc> charter to be restrictive in order to not go all over the >> Marc> place, and I agree in principle... However, this work is >> kinda >> Marc> horizontal: touches many areas, so having a more large >> view of >> Marc> the problem space and documents that depends on this newprep >> Marc> work would be very valuable to the working group >> Marc> work. Therefore, I'm more for opening a bit the charter for >> Marc> the cases like the ones you are talking about. >> >> I'm happy with a restrictive charter so long as the work areas >> identified today (including mine) are included. > > my guess is that we most likely will discover other issues/newprep > potential "customers" as we go, that it might be useful to work on, > since they have a lot of similarities with the others official in the > charter. Agreed. > therefore, more "opened" than closed charter. We're trying to balance two things here: (1) we want to get as much input as possible from current and potential customers of stringprep or newprep/stringprepbis/whatever, but (2) we want to scope the WG tightly enough that it doesn't have a mandate to work on "anything related to internationalized strings". >> I'm happy drawing a >> line in the sand and saying "here's what we'll touch first," so long as >> people who bring up items now get included. I'd probably be happier >> with a reasonably open charter. >> >> I'm not at all happy if the items I bring up or other similar items >> brought up now are excluded. In an email exchange with Marc and Alexey Melnikov last week, I proposed adding the following paragraph to the charter: Although the group may provide advice regarding other technologies, it will prioritize work on the above-listed stringprep profiles and will take on additional tasks as official milestones only after rechartering. We might want to broaden that a bit further to explicitly mention seeking feedback from customers other than the existing stringprep profiles: Although the group will seek input from and may provide advice to "customers" working on other technologies, it will prioritize work on the above-listed stringprep profiles and will take on additional tasks as official milestones only after rechartering. Peter -- Peter Saint-Andre https://stpeter.im/
<<attachment: smime.p7s>>
_______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf