Tim Bray wrote: > However, I suggest we really don't know where consensus lies. In > recent weeks, we've had a substantial number of Paces posted, quite a > few of them plausible, and a mind-boggling amount of discussion about > them. The first step is for your luckless co-chairs to go through that > discussion and see if there are any obvious consensus calls that can be > made without even formally scheduling stuff. > > Now, it's perfectly OK to make proposals on re-organizing the draft to > improve it. But at this point it seems out of line to abandon our > process, which is showing signs of bearing fruit.
+1 -1 to this draft. I observe we've been through this with other experimental drafts and wholesale rewrites already. My opinion is this approach does not work. Draft06 is being sent to IETF next week once the moratorium has been lifted and draft07 is being worked up. I suggest anyone who's serious about the standards track focus their efforts there. Iterating and improving the standards track document is evidently a superior approach than rip and replace. cheers Bill
