On 24.07.2016 11:16:26, Dave Cridland wrote:
>
> I've given the Network Objects spec a pass - they're mostly minor
> comments until we hit email, where I suspect some discussion might
> be needed. I know a reasonable amount about email - I'm not an
> expert, but most of my RFCs are in that space - so happy to chat
> through these in a call if you prefer.
>
Hi, Dave -
Appreciate all the feedback! Ivan and I will review and respond to
as many of your comments as possible today.
Regarding the email object, there are a number of other people with
expertise in the TC who contributed to the current state of
development. Happy to schedule a call focused on polishing the email
object, but we need to find a time that allows some of the other
contributors to join the discussion.
--
Cheers,
Trey
++--------------------------------------------------------------------------++
Kingfisher Operations, sprl
gpg fingerprint: 85F3 5F54 4A2A B4CD 33C4 5B9B B30D DD6E 62C8 6C1D
++--------------------------------------------------------------------------++
--
"There are two types of people: those who fit into my taxonomy and
those who do not." --anonymous
