[rfc-i] Containment considered harmful

Joe Touch touch at isi.edu
Sat May 26 09:37:04 PDT 2012

On May 26, 2012, at 9:00 AM, Joe Hildebrand wrote:

> On 5/26/12 9:29 AM, "Joe Touch" <touch at isi.edu> wrote:
>> Show me a need that isn't driven by support for editing.
> Show me an argument that doesn't consist of repeating the same catchphrase.
> Every time you've asserted this, I've tried to amplify or add a use case.  I
> would appreciate the same consideration.

I gave a very detailed argument. I provided the detail of what I consider a minimal set needed based on current requirements.

You - and others - keep tossing out "possible future uses by others" as driving requirements. That's not helpful at all.

> You don't think our use cases are interesting or useful.  That doesn't mean
> they don't exist.

You - and others - have yet to show me an example that doesn't involve:

	a) editing a post-submission format for revision
	b) editing a post-submission format for inclusion in another doc
	c) a fantasy-based search (find all code, find all IPR statements)

Unless we know the use requirements of post-submission formats, we're not going to agree.


More information about the rfc-interest mailing list