RE: [xri] POLL: Syntax 2.0 or 2.1

["Gabe Wachob" <gabe.wachob@amsoft.net>]

Here's the problem with that Drummond - we don't have those requirements in
front of us in this TC so I can't even evaluate your assertion.

It seems like we've been doing this for a while (engineering syntax for
requirements that I'm not sure we all are aware of, or at least don't all
understand). Those of us who weren't following should have been pushing back
more - but quite frankly, it's hard to keep up. 

So, I have to vote -1 based on the requirements I understand them AND based
on the fact that syntax 2.0 is widely deployed already which raises the bar
for significant changes like those being proposed.

I hope that's not a surprise. I thought this vote was done and settled, so I
haven't been pushing back that hard (except as to "we need to have finished
about 2 years ago") on these topics. 

Again, -1 vote from me. 

	-Gabe

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Drummond Reed [mailto:drummond.reed@cordance.net]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2007 3:44 PM
> To: 'Tan, William'; 'Gabe Wachob'
> Cc: xri@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: RE: [xri] POLL: Syntax 2.0 or 2.1
> 
> Again, I want to make sure it's clear why this is such a big issue: the
> XDI
> RDF model uses the "grammer" of global-xrefs. This "grammer" cannot be
> duplicated (at least in any easy way I can figure out) by "going back" to
> 2.0 syntax.
> 
> So this issue is deep, deep, deep.
> 
> =Drummond
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tan, William [mailto:William.Tan@neustar.biz]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2007 3:33 PM
> To: Gabe Wachob
> Cc: xri@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: Re: [xri] POLL: Syntax 2.0 or 2.1
> 
> Yes. Xrefs can only appear within parentheses.
> 
> Gabe Wachob wrote:
> > Can you spell out the implications of this choice so we know exactly
> what
> it
> > is we are voting for/against?
> >
> > That is, we are saying that XREFs basically stay as is and that the
> > @foo+bar+baz syntax goes away?
> >
> > 	-Gabe
> >
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Tan, William [mailto:William.Tan@neustar.biz]
> >> Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2007 3:25 PM
> >> To: xri@lists.oasis-open.org
> >> Subject: [xri] POLL: Syntax 2.0 or 2.1
> >>
> >> We did an informal poll at the f2f two weeks ago on whether we should
> >> stick with XRI Syntax 2.0. I suggest we vote again on the list.
> >>
> >> +1 - to support concatenated syntax
> >> 0 - don't care
> >> -1 - no concatenated syntax
> >>
> >> I'm reverting my vote to -1 because the solution is too confusing IMHO.
> >>
> >> =wil
> >>
> >
> >
> >