[occi-wg] confusion about status of link / headers
andre at merzky.net
Mon Oct 19 12:16:04 CDT 2009
+1 on procedure
Quoting [Tim Bray] (Oct 19 2009):
> On 2009-10-19, at 9:53 AM, Alexis Richardson wrote:
> > Well it sounds like at least three people, including myself, prefer
> > the IETF model.
> Well, filling in some details then... In an IETF WG there are
> typically one or two co-chairs and then one or two co-editors.
> Typically the editors produce a sequence of drafts; they get to make
> lots of judgment calls, particularly on wording, and to include their
> own solutions to issues that haven't really been discussed yet. Then
> when things get intense, the chairs eventually decree what the
> consensus is and the editors do that. It's really helpful that at any
> one time, there's one internet-draft which is the subject of
> discussion. When I was chairing I used to demand that suggested
> changes come with complete "camera-ready" deltas aimed at the current
> draft. In the Atom WG we had a wiki which was mostly used to
> construct these change proposals.
> occi-wg mailing list
> occi-wg at ogf.org
Nothing is ever easy.
More information about the occi-wg