Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
(...)
It's the compromise we/I willingly make to be able to work inside the process to help shape it the way we/I think it should be shaped. The only alternative is to try to start another standards body, but I think you will find that, like the other standards bodies, that NDA's will be a part of the process if you want serious players to participate. One of the big issues surrounding standards is the inclusion/discussion of proprietary information offered by participating entities (companies). Whether or not you like the existence of commercial entities in the process, they are there.OK, I'll buy the previous paragraph. But that the participants do sign a NDA does not mean that the group is silent throughout the process, as it often happens with current JSRs. While I can understand that some of the discussions should remain secret, I think that partial agreements (or blocked areas), roadmaps, current work, etc. could and should be communicated, and also feedback asked more frequently. At a bare minimum, a JSR should publish something (be it a status report, demo, API proposal, open issue list, recount of activity,...) at least every three months, and use this information to gather feedback from the outside via a public discussion list.
I think the spirit is something along these lines, with the public draft phase, etc., but I think the process can be (and sometimes is) seriously abused. I also think that the temporal granularity of the process was meant to be much smaller than it is becoming, so the concerns I express do apply more and more.
Another *constructive* suggestion could be having a different role, people that would not be forced to sign a NDA, and thus could only be exposed to "public domain" information, but who could be involved in the process restricted to this. This would enforce even more the need of regular unrestricted feed back. These people could act as "hubs" between public lists and the EG.
The whole process reminds me of the bullshit that the European Esprit Program became some time ago, where any company could refrain from having to justify public money by just saying that the work was "a commercial trade". I've played in this field already, and in both sides. ;-)
Regards, (I'm trying to be as much constructive as I can, being in bed with a flu and my back aching, pending a NMR test to see if it is damaged or not ...)
Santiago
geir
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
