W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org > January to March 2001

RE: Complexity and Core Considerations

From: Chris Kaler <ckaler@microsoft.com>
Date: Sat, 3 Feb 2001 13:23:24 -0800
Message-ID: <3FBE0C2659BC3B4EAB3536F20FA2503901BAD460@red-msg-02.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
To: "'Jim Whitehead'" <ejw@cse.ucsc.edu>, "Ietf-Dav-Versioning@W3. Org" <ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org>
I second this.

-----Original Message-----
From: Jim Whitehead [mailto:ejw@cse.ucsc.edu]
Sent: Saturday, February 03, 2001 11:01 AM
To: Ietf-Dav-Versioning@W3. Org
Subject: RE: Complexity and Core Considerations

> 1) Is the current form of the specification too complex?  Yes/No/Maybe.
> Why?

No.  Complexity is in the eye of the beholder -- this specification seems as
complex as needed to specify the included functionality.  This specification
is actually smaller than the *user's* manual for most CM systems.

> 2) Does there remain sufficient discussion going on surrounding
> the OPTIONS that the draft should be split into two documents, CORE and
> OPTIONS, so that we can move CORE forward?  Yes/No/Maybe.  Why?

I'm in favor of splitting the document, since I think that will make it
crystal clear exactly what constitutes core versioning.  Thus, I'm in favor
of splitting, even if all the parts are submitted at once.  Document
splitting doesn't imply lack of adoption -- we've seen messages on this list
in the past few days from major vendors indicating they will implement broad
swathes of the specification.

- Jim
Received on Saturday, 3 February 2001 16:24:01 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:55:46 UTC