Subject: [clue] Adopting draft-presta-clue-data-model-schema as a WG document

From: Mary Barnes <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 8 Jul 2013 13:36:26 -0500

Hi all,

As was discussed at the virtual interim on June 25th, there is a
proposal for the WG to approve the adoption of
draft-presta-clue-data-model-schema as a CLUE WG document:
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-presta-clue-data-model-schema/

Please respond "Yes" or "No" as to whether you believe the document
should be adopted no later than Sunday July 14th, 2013, so the authors
have time to submit as a WG document before the deadline, noting that
there is a single deadline for IETF-87 (July 15th, 24:00 UTC).

If you have specific comments on the document, PLEASE post those in a
separate thread with an appropriate title to facilitate tracking.

Thanks,
Mary.

Note: we are working on the minutes from the virtual interim and will
post within the next 24 hours.

---

From: Christian Groves <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 09 Jul 2013 13:24:02 +1000

Hello Mary,

YES but there are things (e.g. micPattern, aspect ratio) in the data 
model that are not described in the framework. I'd support it as a WG 
draft that aligns with the framework.

Regards, Christian

On 9/07/2013 4:36 AM, Mary Barnes wrote:
> _______________________________________________
> clue mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/clue
>

---

From: "Duckworth, Mark" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2013 10:07:11 -0700

YES, and I agree the data model and framework documents need to be made consistent.
I intend to follow up on Ticket #35: "Ensure Framework and Data model terminology is consistent".  This could result in changes to both documents.

Mark

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of
> Christian Groves
> Sent: Monday, July 08, 2013 11:24 PM
> To: [email-masked]
> Subject: Re: [clue] Adopting draft-presta-clue-data-model-schema as a WG
> document
> 
> Hello Mary,
> 
> YES but there are things (e.g. micPattern, aspect ratio) in the data model that
> are not described in the framework. I'd support it as a WG draft that aligns
> with the framework.
> 
> Regards, Christian
>

---

From: Paul Kyzivat <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2013 13:10:34 -0400

On 7/8/13 2:36 PM, Mary Barnes wrote:

> should be adopted

YES. (speaking as an individual.)

	Thanks,
	Paul