Subject: [yam] Notes from YAM meeting in Maastricht

From: Tony Hansen <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2010 00:01:04 -0400

These are my "personal notes" from YAM meeting in Maastricht. Official 
minutes will be coming out later, but these notes will serve as a 
catalyst for further discussion.

There were two topics on the agenda in Maastricht.

1) Alexey asked for some face time with "the MIME experts" to discuss a 
W3C registration of image/svg+xml. A variety of issues were discussed, 
with recommendations that portions of the spec be rewritten.

2) The ramifications of Russ Housley's "two track" proposal were 
discussed. See the slides for a summary of the issues.

At the end, it came down to the following questions:

     a) should the YAM working group continue working at its current 
rate on its current doc set?
     b) should the YAM working group "hit the pause button"?
     c) should the YAM working group shut down?

Absolutely no one went for the last item, (c). However, the room was 
fairly evenly split between support for both (a) and (b).

I will be posting another message shortly to begin an open discussion of 
this second topic.

If you want to make corrections or expansions to my notes, please 
respond to this message. However, if you want to discuss the "two track" 
ramifications, please reply to my follow-on message.

Thanks!

     Tony Hansen
     YAM co-chair

---

From: S Moonesamy <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2010 16:51:56 -0700

At 21:01 09-08-10, Tony Hansen wrote:
>These are my "personal notes" from YAM meeting in Maastricht. 
>Official minutes will be coming out later, but these notes will 
>serve as a catalyst for further discussion.

I haven't had time to work on the YAM minutes as there were some 
pressing issues in another working group.

>fairly evenly split between support for both (a) and (b).

This is not a correction of the above.

The question was put to the working group twice.  There were six 
people for (a), six for (b) and nobody for (c).  On the second round, 
there were seven people for (a), nine for (b) and nobody for (c).  26 
people attended the YAM WG session.

Regards,
S. Moonesamy