W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > October to December 2004

Re: Comments on draft-dusseault-http-patch-06

From: Lisa Dusseault <lisa@osafoundation.org>
Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2004 11:24:06 -0700
Message-Id: <E587106D-2132-11D9-AC2A-000A95B2BB72@osafoundation.org>
Cc: "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@gbiv.com>, HTTP working group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>

>
> Proposal: as both GDIFF (unclear IPR and no MIME type) and VCDIFF 
> (unclear source license and complexity?) seem to be problematic as 
> REQUIRED delta format, we may want to sit down and come up with a 
> really simple delta format and use *that* in the PATCH spec (either 
> in-line or in a separate document).

That sure sounds reasonable; are you up for that?  I'm not given my 
other responsibilities right now.  Does anybody know if diff -e is 
standardizable?

I have also looked into a standard XML diff format, and talked to 
Adrian Mouat about standardizing his format.
  - code: http://treepatch.sourceforge.net/  or 
http://diffxml.sourceforge.net/
  - dissertation/specification: 
http://prdownloads.sourceforge.net/diffxml/dissertation.ps?download

I would think diff formats would generally be better off defined in 
separate documents so that they can be reused, HTTP and PATCH are by no 
means the only applications that could use a standard diff format.

Lisa
Received on Monday, 18 October 2004 18:24:41 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 06:49:36 GMT