On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 1:21 AM Corentin <corentin.jabot_at_[hidden]> wrote:

>
> Thanks Hubert.
> I added more prose.
>
> I would like to know if you have sustained objections such that you do not
> want to see this paper polled, because that's currently not clear to me.
>

My interpretation of the situation is that the paper was (and is) still
evolving due to new information that took significant time and effort to
discover and analyze. I believe "sustained objections" only come into play
when all appropriate discussion has been exhausted. Discovery of new
information and procedural expectations of technical discussion in the
appropriate groups in meetings having quorum is different from "objection"
to a paper in a poll.


> If so, I would like to know what direction you would like this paper
> to take.
>

The process of discussing and reviewing the paper seems to have progressed
well. I have responded to the thread for the meeting 12 or so hours from
now with further comments. The ask regarding allowing wide_literal to
return id::unknown is a direction that I want the paper to take.