Subject: [tap] Wakey wakey

From: Salve J Nilsen <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 10:19:27 +0100 (CET)

Hey guys,

It's been quiet for a while now. Any news to report? :)

- Salve

-- 
#!/usr/bin/perl
sub AUTOLOAD{$AUTOLOAD=~/.*::(\d+)/;seek(DATA,$1,0);print#  Salve Joshua Nilsen
getc DATA}$"="'};&{'";@_=unpack("C*",unpack("u*",':4@,$'.#     <[email-masked]>
'2!--"5-(50P%$PL,!0X354UC-PP%/0\`'."\n"));eval "&{'@_'}";   __END__ is near! :)

---

From: Gaurav Vaidya <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 17:48:16 +0800

Heya,

> It's been quiet for a while now. Any news to report? :)
Not as far as I know. The latest draft standard at
http://testanything.org/wiki/index.php/TAP_at_IETF:_Draft_Standard was
polished up quite a lot over the last  QA Hackathon, and is in pretty
good shape, I think. Should we format it as an RFC and start
circulating it through the larger Perl community for feedback?

cheers,
Gaurav

---

From: "David E. Wheeler" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 09:14:00 -0700

> circulating it through the larger Perl community for feedback?

+1

David

---

From: Gaurav Vaidya <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 00:46:33 +0800

Heyo,

On Oct 27, 2009, at 12:14 AM, David E. Wheeler wrote:
>> good shape, I think. Should we format it as an RFC
Done'd.

Transcribing content from Wiki to XML went pretty well. You can see  
the XML file I got at:
	http://github.com/gaurav/test-anything-protocol/blob/master/draft-vaidya-test-anything-protocol-00.xml
There's several changes from the original; the biggest is that I've  
removed comments from the ABNF descriptions, as they were forcing the  
diagram to be wider than 72 characters, the width restriction on RFCs.  
We'll have to reformat these to make them look good at shorter widths.  
Other changes have been mostly to accommodate the very different  
layout of code examples; I haven't yet figured out how to get xml2rfc  
to indent them as I'd like. Otherwise, Wiki to XML conversations  
turned out to be pretty easy to do.

Our bigger issues are: we're still missing an "IANA considerations"  
section (do we need it? The JSON RFC has one, but perhaps we can get  
by without an explicit 'application/tap' MIME type for now?). We also  
have atleast the CRLF/LF and encoding to sort out, but adapting the  
wording from the XML specification doesn't seem too hard.

We probably also need to tighten up the specification, particularly in  
terms of definitions, things which need to be compulsory (which need  
to be specified with MUST, SHALL, etc.), and other minutiae.

Fork away at http://github.com/gaurav/test-anything-protocol/, edit  
the wiki, or start commenting on the draft.

>> and start

Would it be easier to share the link to the wiki page instead of the  
RFC? That way, contributors could easily make the changes or record  
comments directly at testanything.org.

cheers,
Gaurav