[Standards] A Meta-Discussion about the Standards Process

Winfried Tilanus winfried at tilanus.com
Fri Jan 17 13:12:45 UTC 2020

On 1/16/20 10:50 PM, Daniel Gultsch wrote:


> I think we are currently in a situation where developers implement and
> deploy experimental XEPs which made us more and more careful of what
> we accept as experimental. When I say clean up I mean advancing
> certain XEPs to draft to get into a situation where developers can
> take the "Do not implement this XEP in production" warning serious
> again because there are enough 'draft' and 'stable' XEPs to choose
> from.

In the discussion up to now, and this is not a specific reaction to this
comment, I am missing the question *why* a XEP doesn't advance.
- does the council need more time to assess it?
- is it abandoned by the author (but still useful)?
- is it incomplete (too many ToDo's)?
- does it have protocol issues?
- are there IP issues?

I would love to see bugtracking against XEP's and the council assigning
labels to bugs when they are blocking propagation to the next stage.
That would make the process clearer for XEP authors and inform
developers on possible issues when implementing experimental XEPs.

(Still, IMHO, it has to be very clear what criteria are used before
accepting a XEP as official XEP and which XEP's are accepted as such and
which not).


privacy strategist & privacy architect

More information about the Standards mailing list