Ed Summers writes:
> On 5/9/07, Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> > Yes. The point of this extension is that it's an extension, intended
> > in part to serve a model of what extensions should look like. If we
> > throw our hands up and change the core specifications every time an
> > extension comes along, we're admitting that we got the extension
> > mechanism wrong.
> So if we're testing the waters of SRU extensions I think what is
> lacking here is a process more than any technical capability. I'm
> thinking something like the following could work:
> 1. someone suggests the extension on sru-implementors
> 2. someone drafts the proposed extension and make it available on the web
> 3. more discussion on sru-implementors about draft
> 4. someone edits draft appropriately
> 5. a group votes (not sure who)
> 6. publish draft (or not)
> Does something like this already exist?
Yes, it's exactly what's happening right now. We're in stage 3.
/o ) \/ Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]> http://www.miketaylor.org.uk
)_v__/\ "That's your solution? Put a hot chick on the cover of your
submission?" / "It's not MY solution, it's HISTORY's solution!" --
Bob the Angry Flower.