[standards-jig] informational vs. standards-track
matt at jivesoftware.com
Thu Jul 31 22:14:32 UTC 2003
> Perhaps we should take your work in the Conferencing JIG as a model,
> then? I recall over a year with absolutely no progress, not even a
> requirements document. Then someone needed to step in and clean up the
I would advocate for a much ligher-weight process than a JIG, but still
to have an open expert group around many JEP's. Some reasons this would
* It would provide a way to create some responsibility for individuals
contributing to a JEP besides the JEP author (although it sounds like
this didn't work before so we'd have to figure out how it could work).
* If we create some simple tools, like a forum for each expert group,
it would be a handy way to collect all discussion around that JEP rather
than having to parse back through the standards list. This would
potentially make it much easier for new people working on the JEP to get
up to speed.
We'd also want to try to enforce progress (however much that can be
done) by establishing dates for when the JEP moves through the various
steps of standardization.
More information about the Standards