Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!sdd.hp.com!ucsd!ucbvax!NRTC.NORTHROP.COM!Stef
From: Stef@NRTC.NORTHROP.COM (Einar Stefferud)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.multi-media
Subject: Re: the debate between Jon and Craig
Message-ID: <3564.651517026@nma.com>
Date: 24 Aug 90 16:57:06 GMT
References: <9008240851.aa02995@NRI.NRI.Reston.VA.US>
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Reply-To: Stef@nrtc.northrop.com
Distribution: inet
Organization: The Internet
Lines: 39

Picking up on Vint's comments, I just want to emphasize that the reason
why I would like to see some IFIP WG 6.5 work done that focuses on
issues that are currently beyond the work of the standards bodies is to
avoid the worst of the implications of Vint's observations.  

After work starts in the standards bodies, all of what Vint observes
will kick in and it will become very difficult to discover ways to
achieve a good design.  

So, lets step ahead and work beyond where the standards bodies are
working so as to get a jump on them for the next round.  The work I am
visualizing has to do with conceptual modeling and articulation, along
with surveys of all the ways things are now being done, and what the
standards bodies are working on, plus research on new ways to do things.

Those folk who do not like to do such work are not invited.  I would
hope that they will not begrudge us the possibility of doing the work
that we want to do.  

We certainly do not suggest that anyone else stop what they are doing
and wait for us to deliver THE ANSWER!  There may not be any ANSWER.
But this possibility should not stop anyone from searching and
researching.  

As I read much of the recent MMM traffic, I cannot help but feel that we
are mixing our time frames, and I feel caught in a time-warp.  On the
one hand some are trying to discuss new broad concepts, while athers are
saying "that can't be done right now" or "but how about all the PC folk
who want to do somethign right now with what they have?"  

We should not try to hold both discussions in the same "room".  So, lets
try to find some way to segment this discussion into:  

1.  What to do now with what we have now; and

2.  Ignoring todays problems with what we have now, what can we
    consider doing in the future?

Best...\Stef