[standards-jig] informational vs. standards-track

Evan Prodromou evan at prodromou.san-francisco.ca.us
Wed Jul 30 12:56:46 UTC 2003

>>>>> "PS" == Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter at jabber.org> writes:

    PS> So I think all new JEPs should be informational unless the
    PS> author can provide a strong justification for making it
    PS> standards-track.

    PS> Thoughts?

My thoughts are that we already have a great process for doing that!
Standards-track JEPs have to go through a nomination process, be
seconded, get voted on, etc. On top of that, we have "IM Basic", which
specifies what _has_ to be implemented by Jabber software.

What would be the new process for providing said strong justification?
Why should we front-load the current process with an additional
"justification" process?


Evan Prodromou
evan at prodromou.san-francisco.ca.us

More information about the Standards mailing list