Re: New Filtering Draft version posted

On Jun 23 2004, david nicol wrote:
> 
> More to the direct point, I think that the two different directions
> we are in,
> 
> 	1:   define a language for communicating gathered data
> 
> 	2:   define mechanisms for shared Bayesian tuning feedback
> 

The Miller document is so far geared towards the definition and
semantics of a filtering header only. That can be useful provided it's
flexible enough that existing practices generally fit easily into
it. Nobody is going to use something that requires a significant shift
in thinking.

So I'm in favour of keeping that document as simple as possible, and I
agree that a communication language should be investigated
separately. Any findings on that topic can then be distilled and
incorporated as an extension, or at least used to guide the header
semantics.

-- 
Laird Breyer.