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

RE: Submission: deltav subset

From: Jim Amsden <jamsden@us.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2001 19:34:55 -0400
To: ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org
Message-ID: <OF73B7EB3D.7F551CC8-ON85256AE9.0080F7BE@raleigh.ibm.com>
I'm inclined to declare victory on our DeltaV charter and let some servers 
get built on what we have before we start making a lot of immediate 
changes. Of course I would welcome any BOF to determine level of interest 
in extensions, new packages, etc. DeltaV is now firmly on the standards 
track. The next step is to get some implementation and determine 
interoperability issues. If the community fragments immediately on 
different packages that aren't interoperable in meaningful ways, then 
certainly that's good information for the standards process that would 
need to be addressed. But I think the community would benefit from 
attempting to implement the spec as written so we encourage 
interoperability.

As for shutting down DeltaV, we're only at proposed standard. We could 
consider updating the charter to move to the next stage in the lifecycle. 
I would be happy to entertain suggestions as to the content of such a 
charter, and if there's sufficient interest, we can propose the next set 
of work items to the AD's as either continuation of DeltaV (with a new 
charter), or other working groups focused on more specific tasks.





"Jim Whitehead" <ejw@cse.ucsc.edu>
10/18/2001 06:36 PM

 
        To:     "Clemm, Geoff" <gclemm@rational.com>, "'Lisa Dusseault'" 
<lisa@xythos.com>, "Jim Amsden" <jamsden@us.ibm.com>
        cc: 
        Subject:        RE: Submission: deltav subset

 


Geoff Clemm writes:
> I think it is more appropriate to keep it as an
> individual submission until the working group has had
> a chance to review/iterate on it.

This may be true, but IETF policy does say that it is the Chair's 
discretion
on whether a document is a WG draft or an individual submission.

I was just pointing out that Jim may cause friction with the ADs if, by
making a new WG draft, he extends the life of DeltaV when they think it's
close to being shut down. I imagine they are keen to avoid another WebDAV
:-)

But, even if Jim does decide that it should not be a new draft, it would 
be
well within Lisa's rights to hold a BOF at the next IETF with an eye 
towards
creating a new WG, "SDV" (simple Delta V), say.

- Jim
Received on Thursday, 18 October 2001 19:35:28 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 13:57:42 GMT