On May 23, 2006, at 8:35 AM, James M Snell wrote:
The goal is to have a reference implementation that is also usable.
However, I do have to be careful here, the IETF doesn't really do
reference implemenations so the naming of this project is a bit wrong.
We really shouldn't be calling it a "reference implementation"
although
that is the kind of thing we're wanting this to be.
Yes, I think it's a good idea for Apache to include tools for
processing Atom data and implementing the Atom protocol. The only
reason I can imagine for doing this is so that people could use it
and thus avoid re-inventing the Atomic wheel. Apache does not have,
and would not claim to have, the standing to do a "reference" in the
sense of having any normative force. So yes, I think the term
"reference" is probably misleading enough to constitute a problem.
Why not just call it something breathtakingly original like Apache
Atom Library or some such? -Tim
