Comments on: Update on ILS-Discovery Interface work

By: jrochkind

jrochkind — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 02:02:04 +0000

This is good stuff, you guys have done a good job with this.

I’m sure later need for changes will occur only after people start implementing, and realize the barriers, that’s how it goes.

By: John Mark Ockerbloom

John Mark Ockerbloom — Thu, 23 Oct 2008 19:52:16 +0000

There wasn’t an explicit straw poll, but a lot of the vendors had representatives at the meeting, and both before and during the meeting many of them expressed an interest in making the “basic” APIs more specific and targeted. The changes suggested here reflect that, and my recollections and notes indicate they also reflect the expressed consensus of the group at the meeting.

By: Peter Murray

Peter Murray — Tue, 21 Oct 2008 18:12:38 +0000

One of the outcomes from the earlier Berkeley meeting was a signed statement of ILS vendors supporting the DLF-ILS API work. Notably, one vendor abstained from signing the agreement (looking for more information before signing on). Was a similar straw poll taken after this meeting to gauge buy-in from the various participants?