>>>>> On Sun, 4 Nov 2012 20:32:46 -0500, Leonardo Uribe <lu4242_at_gmail.com> said:
LU> Basically, the discussion about how this feature should looks like
LU> is about these three points. The position of the EG about them will
LU> decide the final result. Personally, I'm willing to support full
LU> multi-templating proposal, because I believe it is possible to
LU> design an intermediate solution, but at the end is up to the members
LU> of the EG to decide which route should be taken.
>>>>> On Mon, 5 Nov 2012 16:29:37 +0100, Frank Caputo <frank_at_frankcaputo.de> said:
FC> I think having more than one contract is hard to maintain.
Leonardo,
Whenever we've had a doubt about how much to do, and we ended up
choosing the "do less" option, we always did so with the understanding
that we would not be closing the door to a more full option in a future
revision of the spec. In this case, I think the reduced scope option
*does* leave the door open to a more full proposal. Do you see any
problems in the current state of the reduced scope option that would
close the door to a more full proposal later?
Ed
--
| edward.burns_at_oracle.com | office: +1 407 458 0017
| homepage: | http://ridingthecrest.com/