[standards-jig] Thoughts on JEP-0041 (Jidlink)

Ben Schumacher ben at blahr.com
Tue Nov 26 18:36:00 UTC 2002


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

After several months of relative silence from my in the JSF, I've
decided to come out swinging. Really, I was just trying to catch up on
what's been going on in my virtual absence (been buried under work --
not really absent).

While pouring over JEPs, I came across JEP-0041 and was struck by a
distinct impression that this JEP adds little value.

1) What does this protocol give us that can't be accomplished by feature
negotiation.
2) JEP-0041 references an outdated version of JEP-0020.
3) JEP-0041 defines an explicit relationship between itself and
JEP-0046, but JEP-0046 doesn't mention JEP-0041 at all.
4) JEP-0041 defines an explicit relationship between itself and
JEP-0047, but JEP-0047 doesn't mention JEP-0041 at all.

Is anybody currently using this JEP? Does anybody seem a further need
for it? If not, can we have it removed from the standards track? It must
overwhelm the council to have to so many JEPs in this continual state of
limbo, and reflects poorly on the JSF's ability to quickly advance the
technology of the protocol.

Cheers,

bs.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.0 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQE9478NUpoGqensAXIRAmAvAJsG48djIHomtkPBbNawaQD3N/AuRQCfeiQH
eUvIU+QSruKM8hr2hyLTh5M=
=MvJ7
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----




More information about the Standards mailing list