Comments

Some additional comments:

- Thank you for remembering to add Section 7.5.  I think 
  that "is" should be "its".

- I disagree with the following statement in Section 1:  

	"The exception is the working-resource and workspace 
	options.  These provide the same logical functionality 
	but with significantly different client/server 
	performance/complexity tradeoffs.  It is expected that 
	only a limited number of servers will support the 
	working-resource and the workspace options."   

  Working-resources are created when versions are checked out.  
  A workspace resource is a collection whose members are related
  version-controlled and non-version-controlled resources.  These
  are not the same logical functionality. 

  Also, a working-resource can have a workspace property which
  does not make it logically orthogonal to a workspace in the
  context of the discussion in section 1.

  My suggestion is to end section 1 with the existing statement
  that the specification options are designed to be logically 
  orthogonal.  
  
- Overall the specification has the necessary components and I 
  have provided input to ensure its completeness.  I do go back 
  to a comment posted on the list a week or two about the 
  specification's complexity.  As I review the specification 
  now, I do agree and feel that the specification is 
  complex.  I would like to see complexity revisited in 
  Minneapolis as an action item.



	Thanks,

	Mark