On Wed, May 07, 2003 at 09:56:21PM -0600, why the lucky stiff wrote:
> >From Ingy:
> I'll tell you what. Let's shoot for the end of April for announcing a
> Release Candidate. (It seems that) Why, Mike Orr and I are are in the
> middle of implementing a lot of stuff in the next 6 weeks. If the spec
> can survive that period, then I'm willing to go to a release candidate.
> I think the implementations are the only hold up. It's difficult to
> announce a 1.0 of YAML without adequate software to back it up. But
> that's all changing quickly.
I wouldn't hold up releasing the spec till all the language implementations
are done. Especially not PyYaml. PyYaml will be ready when it's ready.
The one thing I'd add, which I've requested before, is a paragraph in
section 4.1 (Information Models, Overview) saying these models are
meant to guide the implementor, not dictate the user interface or
its terminology. A concrete "loader" or "dumper" may have options to
start and end at any point in the diagram, or even at a point in
between or off the diagram, if it's convenient for the user. What's
important is that *if* the user wants a representation that is
exactly one of those models, there should be an obvious way to get it,
or it should be obvious that that model is not implemented.
Perhaps the paragraph starting, "A processor need not
expose the event stream..." implies this. However, that paragraph is
written in such technicalese that it would be easy to not realize
what it's saying. That's why I would add a paragraph in plain
language talking about the relationship of the diagram to concrete
The link in section 5 labelled "http://yaml.org/type" is broken. The
label is correct but the link goes to a nonexistent page.
-Mike (Iron) Orr, mso@... (iron@...)
English * Esperanto * Russkiy * Deutsch * Espan~ol