[sc34wg3] N358 and N372 Requires synchronization: changes in workplan, names, etc.

[Lars Marius Garshol]

* James David Mason
| 
| N372 is the output of a WG3 meeting. It has been accepted by
| SC34. However, that doesn't constitute anything binding on either
| SC34 or WG3. It's mostly just a declaration of where we think we're
| going.

I think it's time we got this on the table: personally I very strongly
disapprove of the "process" that led to the addition of the roadmap
text in N372 and I do not consider that we have agreed on what is
stated there. The proposal was not properly discussed at a meeting,
nor did everyone who should have had the opportunity have a chance to
comment on the proposal before it was "voted" on.

I think this is a crucial issue. In fact, it should hardly be
necessary to say that, given that this is the roadmap or blueprint for
everything we'll be doing over the next few years. That we agree on
it, discuss it properly, and document it properly is supremely
important. 

My work as an author of text for the standard(s) is currently being
held up by this, so I would very much like to have this resolved, and
I don't think we can wait until London with working out a new and
improved roadmap.

So, what should we do? I would much prefer tearing the new roadmap to
shreds and going back to the old one, but failing that we should
discuss this, whether via email, phone, or IRC. We need to agree on
the process first, though.

-- 
Lars Marius Garshol, Ontopian         <URL: http://www.ontopia.net >
GSM: +47 98 21 55 50                  <URL: http://www.garshol.priv.no >