On 26 May 2014 15:02, Vladimir Batov wrote:

To move forward in a coordinated way how about we create a working group (say, >= 5 people). Then we'd address convert-related issues in the order of importance. Public API first, converter API then, etc. (Or maybe some other design altogether). We'd focus on one thing at a time. Discuss it and then vote. The solution accepted by the majority wins, we document it and move forward to the next item of importance... without running in circles about the previous issues... unless we realize down the track that our solution is flawed somehow.

That won't require any more of the time of the participants than it is now. I am happy to coordinate (whatever that might be), do implementation (to the best of my abilities), etc. Still, if anyone feels strongly about doing that "coordination" thing, step forward, no drama.

Such collaborative approach would take subjectivity out and might bring new unexpected ideas, etc. That I think might actually work. Any one willing to sign up? Jeroen, Roland, Rob? What people think? Let me know if you feel like participating, contributing... If there is no appetite for that, it's still OK.

Whilst I, unfortunately, have little time to spare I'm game and would love to participate in the discussions. Jeroen

On May 26, 2014 9:02:18 AM EDT, Vladimir Batov wrote:

To move forward in a coordinated way how about we create a working group (say, >= 5 people). Then we'd address convert-related issues in the order of importance. Public API first, converter API then, etc. (Or maybe some other design altogether).

+1 I'll join the effort to see if we can resolve the various forces and come up with something appealing to most potential users. The group should work off list to avoid cluttering the list and to have some time in isolation to play with ideas. We can do that by private e-mail or by setting up a separate mailing list. ___ Rob (Sent from my portable computation engine)