[standards-jig] informational vs. standards-track

Richard Dobson richard at dobson-i.net
Wed Jul 30 17:33:02 UTC 2003

----- Original Message ----- 
>From: "Casey Crabb" <crabbkw at nafai.dyndns.org>
To: <standards-jig at jabber.org>
Sent: Wednesday, July 30, 2003 5:38 PM
Subject: Re: [standards-jig] informational vs. standards-track

> On Wed, Jul 30, 2003 at 05:23:44PM +0200, Ralph Meijer wrote:
> > Hmm. I would say Jabber Enhancement Proposals are just that: proposals.
> > take is we need a separate list of accepted protocols JEPs and call them
> > Jabber Standards[*]. With their own number.
> I'm definately +1 on this. Once something is 'accepted' as standard it
> should move to a different list and be given a new number.

Why would it even need to be a number, I would think the name of the
protocol would be best, as more numbers would introduce confusion, e.g.

JEP-0030 becomes simply Disco.


JEP-0030 becomes JES-0002 or some such.

Extra numbers just seem silly to me.


More information about the Standards mailing list