[sc34-wg1]

[robert_weir at us.ibm.com]

Alex Brown <alexb at griffinbrown.co.uk> wrote on 11/02/2010 11:06:16 AM:

> 
> Our emails crossed - see my recent responses.
> 
> I agree it would be perfectly reasonable if this group decided to 
> include RER considerations in its deliverables.
> 
> What I think would be *unreasonable* is forbidding work on our 
> primary stated task because some experts didn't agree with the NB 
> decision that the task needed doing -- a consensus-driven process is
> not the same as a veto-driven one.
> 

What NBs express today matters more than what NBs expressed in Tokyo.  And 
what they express in the future (if there is another NWIP) will count more 
than what NBs express today. 

So let's not place all our hopes on interpretations of 1989 press release 
and old Plenary resolutions. Instead, let's listen to what is being said 
today.  If we're not going to think this anew, then we might as well just 
re-read the previous ballot comments, and results. 

So what useful work can be done within our scope?  I suggest the area to 
focus on should be profiling of the capability of the ZIP Application 
Note, to make it easier to define conformance for producers and consumers 
that need only a subset of the capabilities of the full Application Note.

-Rob