Closed
Description
Agenda:
| Topic | Owner | Decision/NextStep |
|---|---|---|
| Review last call's action items | @benjagm | |
| Continue the discussion about the consensus process timeframe. More information #338 | @Relequestual | |
| Continue the discussion on identifying all the places where we mention unknown keywords and making the changes to update that we no longer support them | @awwright | |
| Update on not supporting unknown keywords discussion and alternatives #329 | @gregsdennis |
Action items: No actions have been captured.
Notes (in progress):
- @Relequestual started the discussion about the need of a specific timeframe for the consensus process like it has been proposed for the voting process. We had a discussion about when to use consensus vs voting. For example the Python project does not include a specific timeframe for consensus, everyone expect the TSC members to get involved.
- @awwright suggested a timeframe to collect comments to make sure the problem is understood.
- We discussed about incorporating details of the unknown keywords discussion into the use cases document @awwright is working on.
- @awwright provided a detailed update on the uses cases document and JSON Schema objectives and @Relequestual made a comment to make sure everything is included in the charter scope.
- We ended the session discussing about Still Kinda Supporting Unknown Keywords - A call for proposals #329 and what are the alternatives and using a prefix seems to be the preferred option so far. @jdesrosiers shared his thoughts regarding the negative aspects of using "x-".
- We discussed about namespaces as something to explore as an alternative to make it easier to use vocabularies.
Agenda Items rolling over:
- list
Attendees
| Account |
|---|
| @jdesrosiers |
| @gregsdennis |
| @awwright |
| @Relequestual |
| @benjagm |