Subject: [apps-discuss] Call for Adoption: draft-wilde-xml-patch

From: "Murray S. Kucherawy" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 3 May 2013 12:25:02 -0700

This is a call for adoption for draft-wilde-xml-patch.  The document had a
thread of discussion in January that showed some interest within this
working group, and it appears to be material that falls within our
charter.  Accordingly, we'll adopt this as a working group item within the
next couple of weeks unless there's objection to such processing.  I will
act as document shepherd.

-MSK, APPSAWG co-chair

---

From: "Murray S. Kucherawy" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 20 May 2013 13:20:32 -0700

> act as document shepherd.
I've not seen any traffic in support of this in the last couple of weeks.
I realize my message was a "default yes" and thus people may not have felt
the need to respond.  However, in retrospect, there was exactly one person
other than the author that participated in that January thread.  I'm not
certain now whether we have critical mass to justify processing it here.

Does anyone (other than Erik and Tom) support processing it through appsawg?

-MSK

---

From: James M Snell <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 20 May 2013 13:27:25 -0700

I'm +0.5 on this really. It makes sense to process this through as a
WG doc given the how it fits with other related docs, but I'm not
convinced yet just how extensively this will be implemented. Perhaps
we ought to just let this one sit for a while and see if interest
picks up?

On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 1:20 PM, Murray S. Kucherawy
<[email-masked]> wrote:
>> working group, and it appears to be material that falls within our charter.
>> Accordingly, we'll adopt this as a working group item within the next couple
>> of weeks unless there's objection to such processing.  I will act as
>> document shepherd.
>>
>
> I've not seen any traffic in support of this in the last couple of weeks.  I
> realize my message was a "default yes" and thus people may not have felt the
> need to respond.  However, in retrospect, there was exactly one person other
> than the author that participated in that January thread.  I'm not certain
> now whether we have critical mass to justify processing it here.
>
> _______________________________________________
> apps-discuss mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss
>