[WMS] Re: Next steps

  • From: Florian Festi <festifn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: wiki@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2004 18:06:59 +0200 (METDST)


> Don't forget, a final voting is unavoidable nevertheless. And we can
> take on discussions later, or rediscuss things as soon as someone
> again raises valid points on a subject.

We can do this, but the voting that counts will be done by feet.

>>   * What level of detail should the standard have?

I agree on not using MUST and RECOMMENDED too often (at all?).

On the other hand a convergence to a "copy and paste compatibility" for 
simple features should be one goal IMHO.

I would suggest to have an "Implementation Advice" that should be quite 
precise. Text formatting may not be that interesting (there "Use **" might 
be enough) but block formats like lists, headings, tables, ... have lots 
of subtile details. As lots of wikis will have to change their 
parsers anyway we can gain a higher level of compatibility at low costs.
As we have lots of experience about wiki parsers here it should be 
possible to find some sensible default. As this is still below an 
"OPTIONAL" in RFC speak noone should feel forced to follow in this detail.

>>   * What Set of Tags to standardize (leveled approach?)?

> I don't think we need to modularize it at all. Just let it say something
> like "You are free to implent this and that, but neither is a dependency."

I would like to discourage people to implement everything that is 
mentioned in the standard or in other word to standardize more than should 
be reasonably implemented.


Other related posts: