Longer or more meetings?

[Scott W Brim]

On Sun, Dec 08, 2002 09:26:55AM -0800, Marshall Rose allegedly wrote:
> eric - i don't think that "protocol quality" is the thing that is "necessary and
> sufficient". i think there are several factors that have contributed to past
> success, and as much as it irks people when i point this out, i don't think that
> "high quality" is one of them. i think that it's really
> 
> 	just enough quality delivered in a timely fashion

One of the fundamental principles in our design work is that the WG
product be flexible enough to be extensible.  The fact that people come
back in 6 months or two years and modify the protocol doesn't mean the
initial effort didn't have quality.  Rather, the fact that that is
possible shows an admirable level of quality.  So design quality is
fundamental, and if you have really good quality, you can get it out the
door apparently without having finished all the details.  Don't be
fooled.