AX and Artifact Binding Charter Proposal

[Breno de Medeiros]

We are all in violent agreement here.

On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 9:57 AM, John Bradley <john.bradley at wingaa.com> wrote:
> In practice it is a process issue.   Getting folks to agree on a registry
> process is a larger task than adopting the 9 attributes in common use.    I
> see whatever is in the spec becoming part of a registry.
>
> I just don't want to hold up what we need for what we would like.
>
> John B.
> On 2009-11-13, at 2:47 PM, John Kemp wrote:
>
>> Breno de Medeiros wrote:
>>>
>>> On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 4:05 AM, John Bradley <john.bradley at wingaa.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> +1 Fixing the missing policy URL and an agreement on a base set of AX
>>>> URL
>>>> need to be a priority.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Such agreement may be hard to achieve, but a set of URLs to support
>>> discovery of supported attributes would be good. I am inclined to give
>>> on on URL registry at this moment and support baking them into the
>>> spec directly, for expediency reasons
>>>
>> "Baking them into the spec" just says that the specification document
>> itself is the registry, and that change requests are handled by the spec.
>> editors. (so in practice, what's the difference between that and a separate
>> web-page linked from the spec?)
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> - johnk
>
>



-- 
--Breno

+1 (650) 214-1007 desk
+1 (408) 212-0135 (Grand Central)
MTV-41-3 : 383-A
PST (GMT-8) / PDT(GMT-7)