Re: Revised Draft

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>]

Perry,

  I cannot agree with any of you reasoning's here.  It is saying that
a alternitive is really not usefull, in essance.  And that is simply
not so.

Regards,


Perry E. Metzger wrote:
> 
> Christopher Ambler writes:
> > Perry, I realize that my revised draft isn't the IAHC draft, but your
> > comments distress me. What I'm trying to accomplish is the synthesis
> > of consensus, using the IAHC draft as a starting point.
> 
> I understand that, but as I've noted...
> 
> 1) As a person with a substantial amount to gain or lose here, you
>    probably are not an objective third party capable of judging
>    consensus and fulfilling a role as document editor.
> 2) There really isn't a benefit to having comment on a divergent document
>    from the IAHC document, because the document being worked from is
>    the IAHC document.  There are lots of groups that have received
>    requests for comments, including a number of governmental agencies
>    around the world and others. They are going to be commenting on the
>    IAHC document, and it is almost certain that any changes that occur
>    are going to be based on the IAHC document. Keep in mind that a
>    minority of those submitting comments are on this list.
> 3) An "edited" document isn't nearly as valuable to the IAHC as the
>    broad spectrum of opinions being stated here. The reasoning behind
>    the opinions is often at least as important if not more so than the
>    opinions themselves. Context is lost when an "edited" document is
>    submitted -- only a single thread of opinion, stripped of its
>    context, ends up being expressed. I doubt that any edited document
>    can express the depth and breadth of opinion being expressed here.
> 4) Discussion of an "edited" unofficial document here is likely to
>    engender confusion as to which text is being discussed. Its very
>    important that people continue to focus on the given working
>    document. Recall that the IAHC is attempting to synthesize a wide
>    number of comments from many divergent sources of input, and that
>    we are going to have a difficult enough time as it is attempting to
>    decide on a final text without attempting to sort through comments
>    made on unofficial documents to determine if they are relevent to
>    our deliberations on the official document.
> 5) Finally, for purposes of creating its final document, the IAHC
>    already has a document editor. Given the number of sources of input
>    the IAHC is receiving, it is unlikely that any document generated
>    could be the basis for the final IAHC text, so there isn't much
>    point in producing a "finished" text for the IAHC to consume.
> 
> Perry
> Speaking for myself, and not the IAHC, especially given that most of
> the IAHC is gone for the holidays.

-- 
Jeffrey A. Williams
DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java Development Eng.
Information Eng. Group. 
Phone :972-447-1878
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com