OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

xcbf message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]

Subject: Re: [xcbf] Ways forward


I really appreciate you being flexible on the three options.

I think we are heading for your option 2 at the moment.

If that hits problems in getting consensus, we can look at your other 
options.  Phil will be very unhappy if we use option 3, I think, but 
option 1 is clearly a fall-back position.

At the teleconference, no-one actually said they wanted option 2, except 
that both Bancroft and myself spoke on behalf of Phil (who had left) 
saying that we felt he would strongly prefer option 2 of the three options.

Of course, we may have mis-represented Phil!.

But for now, I think my brief (as a possible Editor-to-be-approved) is 
to work with your option 2.

**** But I am not sure we need an Annex  ****

We are talking about a couple of paragraphs of text only, I think.  (As 
Bancroft said, this thing *is* a nit.)  And it can probably go into the 
mnain body.

*** But you can judge what you want when I produce some text. ***

Currently, I am planning a small clause in the main document, with a 
footnote (as suggested by John Messing) saying that this anticipates a 
future Standard.

*** I will look to John M to review the proposed text on that when I 
have produced it. ***

But if, when you see the text, you would prefer it to be moved to a 
(normative) Annex rather than being normative text, I have absolutely no 
objection at all.

I am up to my ears with an ASN.1 meeting trying to meet deadlines to 
progress this EXTENDED-XER stuff, but this OASIS work is important, and 
I will try to get a draft out to the group by Monday, and you-all can 
then decide whether you are happy with the approach and the text.

John L

Ed Day wrote:
> As mentioned on the phone conference, I would provide an E-mail 
> indicating what I believe are acceptable ways forward on the current 
> state of the XCBF document.  All of these are acceptable alternatives:
> 1. Change the base64 encoding to hex to provide full compliance with XER 
> as it stands today,
> 2. Indicate in the text that the encodings are XER compilant with minor 
> deviations, namely the use of base64 in certain fields.  Indicate in an 
> Appendix the current plans for the future XER standard with guidelines 
> as to what is going to be provided so that implementors can plan to make 
> changes to their products to be compilant with the new standard.  Only 
> the part of the new XER standard that affects the XCBF standard needs to 
> be disclosed.
> 3. Delay the XCBF standard until the EXTENDED-XER standard is available 
> and can be referenced.
> Regards,
> Ed Day
> Objective Systems, Inc.
> Tel: +1 (484) 875-9841
> Fax: +1 (484) 875-9830
> Toll-free: (877) 307-6855 (USA only)
> mailto:eday@obj-sys.com
> http://www.obj-sys.com

PLEASE NOTE - As an anti-SPAM measure, e-mails will shortly
not be accepted by my machine from an unknown sender unless
the subject contains the phrase "Hi John".

If you pass my e-mail address to others (which I am very happy
for you to do) please tell them to include this phrase in the
subject line of their first mailing to me.  Thanks.

    Prof John Larmouth
    Larmouth T&PDS Ltd
    (Training and Protocol Development Services Ltd)
    1 Blueberry Road
    Bowdon                               j.larmouth@salford.ac.uk
    Cheshire WA14 3LS                    (put "Hi John" in subject)
    Tel: +44 161 928 1605		Fax: +44 161 928 8069

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]