From: Brian I. <in...@tt...> - 2002-09-09 07:23:48
|
On 09/09/02 01:06 -0600, Tom Sawyer wrote: > On Sun, 2002-09-08 at 17:30, Brian Ingerson wrote: > > The info model gives *me* headaches. I'd like to believe that it's > > because it isn't clear/concise, and perhaps not completely thought > > through for all usages. > > > > Length is not the issue here. It's scope and progress. > > its poorly written honestly, not be mean or anything, but that's my > take. > > it sufferes from "techno-talk", the use of words with specific meanings > (at least i hope they have very specific meanings, or it's really bad!) > used without ever given specific clearification. > > the result of this is that when read, much of the samantic is lost on > the reader, and so must be compensated for by re-reading. Agreed. I think you'll see a whole new section soon. > as for length, well the spec has to be fully laid out, so whatever it > takes to do so is what it takes. if it seems long it is probably because > the spec itself needs simplification. > > by the way 16 months is a small time to give for a technology that could > potentailly be used by many thousands for many decades. don't rush. take > the extra time to get it right. I completely agree. I never get discouraged, because i know we are making good progress. Thanks for the affirmation though :) Cheers, Brian |