JEP types (was: Re: [Members] Motion for Last Call on JEP 88)
richard at dobson-i.net
Mon Mar 22 14:13:44 CST 2004
> Last fall the Council discussed the issue of standards track vs.
> informational, and I've recently captured that discussion in an
> updated version of JEP-0001:
> On that model, *any* protocol JEP would be Standards Track, whereas
> an Informational JEP would define best practices regarding protocol
> development, a usage profile of an existing protocol, or policies and
> procedures for the JSF.
> However, saying that all protocol JEPs are Standards Track does not
> imply that all JEPs apply to all implementations. For example, some
> protocols might be implemented only by servers and components, some
> might be implemented only by clients (or certain kinds of clients),
> and so on.
Cool thats settles it then, there is no real reason then that JEP 88 cannot
be Standards Track, since the concerns some have had that being Standards
Track means it is required to implement is not true.
More information about the Members