Subject: Moratorium on dates discussion, starting now

From: Paul Hoffman / IMC <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 30 Jul 2004 14:01:27 -0700

Greetings again. The current threads on dates are not going anywhere. 
Lots of things are being said, but not much is being heard. And we're 
not getting any closer to a widely-held consensus, yet that is our 
only way forward.

So, as of this message, Tim and I are calling a ONE-WEEK MORATORIUM 
on any date-related discussion on the mailing list. No rehashing, no 
new ideas, no new paces. The purpose of this moratorium on speaking 
on the list is to get everyone to think to themselves:

- what do I want for dates in Atom?

- what do I *really* need for dates in Atom?

There is a big difference between these two questions, and that 
difference is going to be the thing that will help us come to 
consensus. The act of thinking about it silently for a week should 
help each of us (even those who don't have strong opinions) to figure 
out what it is we most care about. That will, in turn, help us work 
towards a consensus.

Note that this a moratorium on mailing-list traffic. It is fine if 
you want to talk to individuals off-line if that will help your 
thought process on what you want, and what you need, for dates.

And, yes, Tim and I have a plan of what we will announce next Friday 
as the way forward. What we do is not relevant to how you should be 
thinking about this, but rest assured that the next step will be one 
that will focus on consensus-building.

So, even if some has just posted something that you really, really 
want to respond to: don't. Sit and think about dates for a week. And 
please participate in the other active non-date topics on the list. 
Thanks!

--Paul Hoffman, Director
--Internet Mail Consortium

---

From: Asbjørn Ulsberg <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 30 Jul 2004 23:39:02 +0200

On Fri, 30 Jul 2004 14:01:27 -0700, Paul Hoffman / IMC <[email-masked]>  
wrote:

> So, as of this message, Tim and I are calling a ONE-WEEK MORATORIUM on  
> any date-related discussion on the mailing list. No rehashing, no new  
> ideas, no new paces.

PaceDates[1] is not a new wiki page, but the pace was very recently  
heavily rewritten to capture some of the ideas I've received from the  
discussion. And  believe that I've read every single message written on  
the subject, so I have a pretty good idea about what people thinks and  
wants.

The pace still needs work, but it seems to get more traction than other  
paces about the subject, and if not, I would really like to know what  
problems people have with it.

> difference is going to be the thing that will help us come to consensus.

PaceDates is a huge compromise on my part (and others that support my  
view). It tries to capture everything mentioned so far, and tries not to  
discriminate anyone. If this is wrong, please let me know what's not  
captured and what opinion is discriminated, and we can work on that.

Another move in the right direction, is BlogToolDateSurvey[2]. It tries to  
provide a matrix and detailed view of what dates are available in current  
weblog publishing tools, and what the different aggregators do with them.

> So, even if some has just posted something that you really, really want  
> to respond to: don't. Sit and think about dates for a week. And please  
> participate in the other active non-date topics on the list. Thanks!

That's something I can live with, but I will continue with my date  
discussions off-list, on #atom and on the Wiki, because there's still a  
lot that needs to be done, and halting that work and those discussions for  
a week will only make me forget it, not give me a deeper understanding  
about anything.

____
[1] <url: http://intertwingly.net/wiki/pie/PaceDates>
[2] <url: http://intertwingly.net/wiki/pie/BlogToolDateSurvey>

-- 
Asbjørn Ulsberg         -=|=-        [email-masked]
«He's a loathsome offensive brute, yet I can't look away»

---

From: Tim Bray <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 30 Jul 2004 16:30:16 -0700

> Another move in the right direction, is BlogToolDateSurvey[2]. It 
> tries to provide a matrix and detailed view of what dates are 
> available in current weblog publishing tools, and what the different 
> aggregators do with them.

While we're staying away from this subject on the list, I think that 
filling in more rows on  BlogToolDateSurvey would be useful research 
for when we come back to it.  For example, I don't see LiveJournal, 
Roller, or Radio on there.  -Tim

---

From: Asbjørn Ulsberg <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 31 Jul 2004 02:01:38 +0200

On Fri, 30 Jul 2004 16:30:16 -0700, Tim Bray <[email-masked]> wrote:

>> BlogToolDateSurvey[2].
> filling in more rows on  BlogToolDateSurvey would be useful research for  
> when we come back to it.

Yes.

> For example, I don't see LiveJournal, Roller, or Radio on there.

Correct. Anyone with experience with these tools, or any tools mentioned  
BlogToolDateSurvey, should consider themself «called for», and fill out  
whatever they know about the specific tool.

The same goes for aggregators, by the way. This is a huge canvas to paint,  
and we will never finish it if not as good as everyone chips in with some  
notes about their experiences.