[occi-wg] confusion about status of link / headers

Andre Merzky 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.
> -Tim
> _______________________________________________
> occi-wg mailing list
> occi-wg at ogf.org
> http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/occi-wg

Nothing is ever easy.

More information about the occi-wg mailing list