[standards-jig] Checking for implementations

David Waite mass at akuma.org
Wed Apr 17 23:54:15 UTC 2002


So are you proposing that we have a separate JEP (possibly 
informational) that defines additional functionality within the browse 
namespace ? Or that individual protocols build on top of browse; 
offering their own live update semantics and extensions?

-David Waite

Jeremie wrote:

>Incorrect, live browsing was never really standardized in any way beyond
>the custom uses defined in the context of a particular implementation
>(such as the conferencing draft).  
>
>The exact wording in the original browse draft was "Live Browsing right
>now is used for specific purposes or services, and not a generalized
>framework" and didn't offer anything beyond some ideas on how it might
>work.
>
>Jer
>





More information about the Standards mailing list