VOEvent v2.0 is ready for prime time

[Rob Seaman]

On Mar 23, 2011, at 5:46 PM, Matthew Graham wrote:

> On Mar 23, 2011, at 5:37 PM, Norman Gray wrote:
> 
>> Matthew was the only one who confidently voted 'No' to 'Ready for RFC?'  Matthew: how do you feel about this now?
> 
> I believe that the recent discussion on this has satisfactorily resolved the issue and that the standard can proceed to RFC, assuming that there are two fully compliant reference implementations.

The deafening silence since last week has been the result of distractions from the VAO team meeting(s) in Tucson.  Time to get back to business.  There was some concern that the WG (well, its chair) was rushing into RFC.  I think we've reached consensus, but it still needs to be written down (principally in section 3.9 of the doc) and everybody will need a chance to comment on the new language.  At that point we will move to RFC.

I'm unaware of any likely hangups in the RFC/TCG/Exec process to follow.  I would appreciate a heads-up if others see trouble a-brewing.  The precise schedule in the IVOA will play out as it plays out, of course.  Numerous exo-IVOA projects are champing at the bit to move forward with v2.0 layered technology on their own schedules.

The first action is on me for a close rereading of the recent messages.  At that point I'll be in contact again.

Rob