Fletcher, Boyd C. CIV US USJFCOM JFL J9935 wrote: > Peter, > > I guess my fundamental issue is that the council is making an > architectural decision of using shared document editing without > understanding the problem or even having read the xep being submitted > as many folks admitted to not even reading it.
In the meeting I asked if anyone had reviewed your proposal in depth. It seems that no one had a chance to do so, but that doesn't mean they have not thought about the problem space. Everyone agreed that more work is required. So we need to get to work. > So if we are going to do this objectively then we need all solutions > weighted against one another and not levy artificial requirements. I see nothing artificial about trying to build a generalized approach that we can re-use for shared editing and real-time synchronization of a wide variety of XML formats, not just SVG. > Perhaps Joonas can update us on his progress and Mats and Ian could > publish a draft of their specs? . This is not a popularity contest, so I don't think it would be all that productive for each person to publish drafts of how they are doing things today (some of which were probably designed to be experimental and not submitted for general consideration). The point is to work through these issues together and find something that lots of folks here can agree on. As you may recall from the previous discussions, Joonas and Mats worked together to hammer out some differences and reach consensus on synchronization issues. I am not sure how Ian's client does whiteboarding right now, but Ian too worked with Joonas on shared editing (both on-list and off-list) so I think that he is on board with that general approach as well. Peter
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
