Subject: [REMOTEUI] Charter Review Feedback

From: "Scott Hollenbeck" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2005 09:41:33 -0400

I've received two IAB-IESG comments on the proposed charter so far.  From
Leslie Daigle ([email-masked]):

"Okay, colour me old -- when did "remote" become a verb?!

I believe this description now boils down to:  the (proposed)
WG will look at the requirements for and possible implementations
of efficiently exchanging specific XML data.  The exchange has
a particular purpose, namely to support a remote interface, but
that's actually peripheral (it defines the nature of the exchange;
it doesn't make UI's the purpose of the WG).

Is it just me, or is there something missing in terms of the "meta"
characteristics of the exchange:  beyond being able to support
the projection of any interface, there will be requirements that
are more network related (e.g., security, authentication, etc).
Presumably, those are intended to be included in the general
"requirements"; I think I'm suggesting they should be called out
separately in the charter."

>From Russ Housley ([email-masked]):

"I noticed two minor editorial errors:

   s/ light weight mechanism / lightweight mechanism /

   s/ work possibly be / work could possibly be /"

The charter will be reviewed for working group approval by the IESG during
the 13 October telechat.

-Scott-

_______________________________________________
REMOTEUI mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/remoteui