[Geojson] Draft Version 6 Feature Complete?

[Allan Doyle]

+1, and maybe the thing to do is write it up in IETF RFC format.

On May 2, 2008, at 7:21 AM, Christopher Schmidt wrote:

> On Thu, May 01, 2008 at 10:19:55PM -0600, Sean Gillies wrote:
>> Christopher Schmidt wrote:
>>> Is there any reason not to call Version 6 "1.0" and start doing work
>>> around documenting it, seting up examples, prettifying it, etc.? I  
>>> think
>>> the specification language is as solid as it's ever going to be.
>>>
>>> I'm +1 on calling Draftv6 final.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>
>> I'd prefer that a not wiki text version be the normative one.
>
> The only section that I consider normative is the 'Specification'
> section: everything else is simply informative. My plan was always  
> that
> that section would be frozen as plain text or flat HTML markup, and  
> that
> we could then develop around that.
>
> Does that make sense? Do we want to use rst for that?
>
> Regards,
> -- 
> Christopher Schmidt
> MetaCarta
> _______________________________________________
> Geojson mailing list
> Geojson at lists.geojson.org
> http://lists.geojson.org/listinfo.cgi/geojson-geojson.org

-- 
Allan Doyle
Director of Technology
MIT Museum