[Standards] A Meta-Discussion about the Standards Process

Dave Cridland dave at cridland.net
Thu Jan 16 21:31:16 UTC 2020


On Thu, 16 Jan 2020 at 20:55, Daniel Gultsch <daniel at gultsch.de> wrote:

> Am Do., 12. Dez. 2019 um 09:24 Uhr schrieb Dave Cridland <
> dave at cridland.net>:
>
> > 2) The "Daniel Plan", which is to encourage Council to adopt pretty well
> anything. If this sounds radical to you, it might help if I described it as
> simply reimposing the de-jure standards process as described in XEP-0001. I
> can certainly see the attraction, but I also think it ignores the status
> quo and the problems alluded to above. Most recently suggested by Daniel
> Gultsch.
>
> If the status quo does not reflect the process described in XEP-0001
> then maybe the status isn’t quo and we should strive to fix that
> instead of changing the process.
>
> If we manage to clean up 'experimental' by advancing what deserves to
> be advanced and documenting issues in widely-deployed but not ready to
> be advanced XEPs I think 'experimental' can become a home for
> controversial[1] XEPs; Maybe even for OMEMO in its current form[2].
>

I will very heavily resist us placing anything knowingly encumbered onto
the Standards Track in any form.


> After all that state contains a big fat warning saying: "Publication
> as an XMPP Extension Protocol does not imply approval of this proposal
> by the XMPP Standards Foundation". Just because we have seen that
> warning so many times that we have learned to ignore it doesn’t mean
> it's there.
>
> Note that what I’m suggesting here is has an order of operations:
> Clean up experimental first and then, and only if successful, start
> making it the 'everything goes' state[3].
>
>
I don't understand this - if we're making Experimental the wild west (and,
Peter, I am speaking metaphorically here), then why "clean it up"? I might
find myself in agreement, mind, I simply don't understand what you mean
here.


> cheers
> Daniel
>
>
> [1]: For a wide variety of controversial
> [2]: In the case of OMEMO we could introduce a second warning
> mentioning the issues with the copyright.
> [3]: For a still reasonable definition of everything
> _______________________________________________
> Standards mailing list
> Info: https://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/standards
> Unsubscribe: Standards-unsubscribe at xmpp.org
> _______________________________________________
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/attachments/20200116/6a06d375/attachment.html>


More information about the Standards mailing list