I agree that it would be best if Paul would state his position on the DL and
come to our meetings. But he doesn't have the time, and instead others have
cited his needs as the reasons why IPP is broken and we need SDP. I have
found that in some cases, he has been misunderstood.
When I have learned more about Paul's views, I have communicated them to the
DL because I felt that the information I gained might be useful even though
it had passed through my filter and might not be exactly what Paul meant.
Although the ideal is that Paul participate in all of our meetings, the
reality is
that he does not. So the important question is how do we deal with that
reality, and still design a solution that is right for us and for Microsoft.
Bob Herriot
At 11:36 AM 5/15/98 , James Walker wrote:
>Jay Martin wrote:
>>
>> Bob,
>>
>> > I just talked with Paul about the requirement for a separate data channel.
>>
>> Given the size, presence and impact Microsoft has in and on the
>> marketplace, I know I'm not alone in requesting (demanding? begging?)
>> that Microsoft speak for themselves on this DL regarding requirements
>> concerns, etc. It's not right that others submit Microsoft's
>> comments on key requirements...let Microsoft speak for themselves.
>>
>> Comments from others on this position? Agree? Disagree? Don't care??
>>
>> ...
>
>I agree 1000%. I think that it is in everybody's best interest
>if people's comments come directly from their own mouth, rather
>than passing through an even unintentional filter.
>
>...walker
>
>--
>Jim Walker <walker@dazel.com>
>System Architect/DAZEL Wizard
>DAZEL Corporation, Austin, TX
>
--=====================_25505414==_.ALT
Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"
I agree that it would be best if Paul would state his
position on the DL and
come to our meetings. But he doesn't have the time, and instead others
have
cited his needs as the reasons why IPP is broken and we need SDP. I
have
found that in some cases, he has been misunderstood.
When I have learned more about Paul's views, I have communicated them to
the
DL because I felt that the information I gained might be useful even
though
it had passed through my filter and might not be exactly what Paul meant.
Although the ideal is that Paul participate in all of our meetings,
the reality is
that he does not. So the important question is how do we deal with
that
reality, and still design a solution that is right for us and for
Microsoft.
Bob Herriot
At 11:36 AM 5/15/98 , James Walker wrote:
>Jay Martin wrote:
>>
>> Bob,
>>
>> > I just talked with Paul about the requirement for a
separate data channel.
>>
>> Given the size, presence and impact Microsoft has in and on
the
>> marketplace, I know I'm not alone in requesting (demanding?
begging?)
>> that Microsoft speak for themselves on this DL regarding
requirements
>> concerns, etc. It's not right that others submit
Microsoft's
>> comments on key requirements...let Microsoft speak for
themselves.
>>
>> Comments from others on this position? Agree?
Disagree? Don't care??
>>
>> ...
>
>I agree 1000%. I think that it is in everybody's best
interest
>if people's comments come directly from their own mouth, rather
>than passing through an even unintentional filter.
>
>...walker
>
>--
>Jim Walker <walker@dazel.com>
>System Architect/DAZEL Wizard
>DAZEL Corporation, Austin, TX
>
--=====================_25505414==_.ALT--