[mdx] kicking starting MDX for REEP

[John Bradley]

I am willing to help as well and the price is right.

On 2013-04-05, at 6:43 AM, Nicole Harris <harris at terena.org> wrote:

> Hi All
> 
> Many thanks for all of the feedback, which I am going to try and summarise and make some recommendations below.
> 
> The overall preference seems to be to keep this in IETF in the independent stream for now, so can I recommend that we agree to this?
> 
> Leif and Ian have expressed a willingness to support taking this work forward at IETF, and Scott is happy to support to ensure it continues to work in current implementations.  Given the demands on Leif's time and the timeframes for REEP, can I suggest that we move forward and contract Ian to take on this work and use Leif's time to support Ian with his knowledge of IETF processes and requirements? (and of course feeding in to the spec).
> 
> I think I am right in saying that the move to a rep on github under Ian's control has already happened?
> 
> I can sort out the arrangements at the TERENA end if Ian and Leif would be willing to schedule a call fairly soon to talk about the scope of work to be done.
> 
> Comments, thoughts, agreements?
> 
> Nicole
> 
> 
> On 4/4/13 8:59 AM, Leif Johansson wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> 4 apr 2013 kl. 03:11 skrev "John Bradley" <ve7jtb at ve7jtb.com>:
>> 
>>> I agree that breaking backwards computability would be a problem, given that there is deployed software.
>>> 
>>> I don't know that anyone is saying they need MDX to immediately be a OASIS standard or IETF RFC.
>>> 
>>> When Chad passed the ID over to Ian there were open issues and discussions.
>>> 
>>> I took Nicole's  more as a question about funding Ian or someone else to keep it current and Shepard the ongoing discussion which has tapered off rather than trying to drive MDX to a final standard.
>>> 
>> my thoughts exactly
>> 
>>> I may have misunderstood.
>>> 
>>> While there is MDX support in some deployed software, I don't think we can say that it is widely used at this point.
>>> I know we are likely going to support publishing and consuming MDX at Ping.
>>> 
>>> I don't off the top of my head know of anyone that is not developing it or deploying it because it is not final.
>>> (I expect Oracle or one of the other big meta-data supporters might but I haven't heard anything from them on it.)
>>> 
>>> John B.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 2013-04-03, at 7:16 PM, "Cantor, Scott" <cantor.2 at osu.edu> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> On 4/3/13 6:09 PM, "Leif Johansson" <leifj at sunet.se> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> I'm happy to help work on this and if that means taking on an editor
>>>>> role then I'll be happy to.
>>>> If there are people willing to work on it at IETF that have issues with it
>>>> they want addressed, then that should happen. I'm fine with that and am
>>>> willing to take the time needed to ensure no breaking changes occur. I've
>>>> shipped software for years that was meant to be compliant with the draft,
>>>> so obviously I can't have that breaking.
>>>> 
>>>> -- Scott
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> mdx mailing list
>>>> mdx at lists.iay.org.uk
>>>> http://lists.iay.org.uk/listinfo.cgi/mdx-iay.org.uk
>> _______________________________________________
>> mdx mailing list
>> mdx at lists.iay.org.uk
>> http://lists.iay.org.uk/listinfo.cgi/mdx-iay.org.uk
> 
> _______________________________________________
> mdx mailing list
> mdx at lists.iay.org.uk
> http://lists.iay.org.uk/listinfo.cgi/mdx-iay.org.uk

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 4507 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.iay.org.uk/pipermail/mdx-iay.org.uk/attachments/20130405/0be52893/attachment.bin>