[Web-SIG] Specification process
luke.arno at gmail.com
Wed Nov 1 22:18:51 CET 2006
On 11/1/06, Ian Bicking <ianb at colorstudy.com> wrote:
> So, maybe two namespace options:
> I personally prefer wsgiorg, since we can do this on wsgi.org, and I
> like what the name implies.
+1 for wsgiorg as a neutral namespace for building
compatibility. -1 for process until we have problems
that process might resolve.
Premature bureaucratization is a sin worse than
premature optimization. For my part, it is enough to
say "hey everybody, we have a few tools that do the
same thing in different ways (all the various
dispatchers for instance); do we want to put things
in a common place in a common way so that these
tools are interchangeable?" That is all we have really
done hear and I think it has worked out fine.
Creating process is already creating overhead when
there is no trouble that we need the process to
address. What additional value comes from lending
"authority" to this convention (url vars)? Bah! ;)
More information about the Web-SIG