RE: [xri] RE: [xri-comment] XRI Resolution

["Drummond Reed" <drummond.reed@onename.com>]

The reason the vote was phrased as it was was to give the Editor's SC a
little bit of leeway to fix minor errata or clarifications when going
from RC2 to the published version of 1.0 (we have to add certain
proofing changes after the vote anyway as called in in the comments).

So far I don't see anything that Loren has pointed out (which are good
points) that falls outside of minor clarifications.

=Drummond 

-----Original Message-----
From: Loren West [mailto:loren.west@epokinc.com]
Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2003 4:14 PM
To: 'Wachob, Gabe'; xri@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [xri] RE: [xri-comment] XRI Resolution

> You make good points. The question we have to tackle now is
> whether or not we should fix these things and have a revote.
> I'm inclined to say we should. But that requires rev'ing the
> spec (1.01?) and revoting. Drummond???
>
> We can do this in very short order. I think we had hoped that
> feedback like yours would come back before the beginning of
> our vote, but I suspected we'd get good feedback like this
> more than a few days after thanksgiving ;-)
>
>       -Gabe
>

The vote for 1.0 is one of the reasons we chose now to start
the implementation.  My suggestion would be to go forward with
version 1.0 voting.  This makes it real enough for some to
start implementations, and anyone actively implementing will
be keeping up with suggested revisions on the TC.

I would hope that the next version could be voted on around
the time the open source project has something running.

=Loren


To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster of
the OASIS TC), go to
http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/xri/members/leave_workgroup
.php.