There was a Searching group proposed, but nobody actually signed up for it
at DC-6, and in the interest of keeping the number of groups to a manageable
size, I didn't initiate it in the first round.
We can do so if there is strong interest in it, but I would personally
prefer to see these issues dealt with in the Implementors group until it
becomes clear that there is sufficient interest and energy for it to carry a
group... is that agreeable?
stu
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ed McNeeley [SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Thursday, December 03, 1998 11:59 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: SIGs and Searching
>
>
> Stu's November 30 posting on the DC Working Groups and Special
> Interest Groups lists two SIGs....
>
> > 1. Standardization [[log in to unmask]]
> and....
> > 2. Implementors [[log in to unmask]]
>
> Now my mind was mush by the time we met to discuss searching,
> but didn't we also agree that Searching should be a SIG? Ray, can
> you clarify for us?
>
> Ed
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|