On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 6:53 PM, Alexis Richardson < alexis.richardson@gmail.com> wrote:
Well it sounds like at least three people, including myself, prefer the IETF model.
Another key consideration of the IETF model is that it is heavily reliant on Internet-Drafts, which are basically an individuals' (or group of individuals') proposed standard. These are then refined through various versions and eventually become standards (draft-nottingham-http-link-header<http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-nottingham-http-link-header>is currently on its 7th revision for example), or lose momentum and expire after 6 months. The point is that the standard as at the point where the majority of the discussion happens is often largely complete - which is not to say that it cannot be changed, but that it should actually work out of the gate. You can consider the document as it is today as an Internet-Draft if you like, and either suggest refinements or propose your own complete document along with a rationale as to why it is superior (which, if it is actually the case, should result in myself and others adopting your approach). Trying to build a standard from scratch is like trying to work out what colour to paint the bikeshed <http://bikeshed.com/>, as evidenced by discussions like this. Sam