Re: [wg-c] Merging WG1 and WG3

[Kent Crispin <kent@songbird.com>]

On Wed, Jul 14, 1999 at 02:43:34PM +0100, Ivan Pope wrote:
> I would like to propose that we merge the WG1 and WG3 lists. It is fairly
> obvious that it is impossible to discuss the subject with a sort of
> artificial isolation imposed.

Personally, I would prefer to leave the lists alone for the time 
being, and just conduct our business on the wg-c list.  For example, 
when you say "merge the two lists", I don't even have it clear in my 
head what their respective charters are, yet, and I don't think I 
could make an informed decision about merging them.

> Also, there have only been four postings to WG3, which implies that there is
> no Working in the Group.
> If we merge them we should be able to push on to some conclusions.
> Agree/disagree?

As I said in my previous post, I think the intent of the separate 
lists was for document drafting purposes, when it might be useful to 
have more focus.  It may very well be that we should merge the 
lists, but I don't think we should do it now.

> Ivan
> BTW, I think WG2 is a special case that can be left unmerged - but it also
> needs to get its act together a bit.

Agreed, but I think that can be deferred a bit, as well.  It seems 
to me that there are lots of ideas floating in people's heads, and I 
think those ideas should be more or less understood by the entire 
group before we go off and try to develop policy.

For example, you sent a long message concerning a process for
approving new gTLDs to some list or another, and I think that the
existence such a possibility is basic information for all three
groups.  

A first requirement for progress of any sort is that we develop a
common language, and that will take a bit of common discussion.

Just out of curiousity, is the term "bridal registry" familiar to
you?

-- 
Kent Crispin                               "Do good, and you'll be
kent@songbird.com                           lonesome." -- Mark Twain