W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > April to June 2007

RE: Required DIFF format [was Re: PATCH Draft]

From: Larry Masinter <LMM@acm.org>
Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2007 12:00:23 -0700
To: "'James M Snell'" <jasnell@gmail.com>
Cc: "'Julian Reschke'" <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, "'Lisa Dusseault'" <ldusseault@commerce.net>, "'Stefan Eissing'" <stefan.eissing@greenbytes.de>, <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <000301c7b9b6$9516bbf0$bf4433d0$@org>

   Better to start with something known than starting from scratch.
   No known IP claims.
   Range retrieval is a kind of "server patch client".

PATCH focuses on client-patch-server. But there's no reason not
to consider server-patch-client, and consider range retrieval
to be a special case of that.




-----Original Message-----
From: ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org [mailto:ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org] On
Behalf Of James M Snell
Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2007 10:42 AM
To: Larry Masinter
Cc: 'Julian Reschke'; 'Lisa Dusseault'; 'Stefan Eissing';
ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: Required DIFF format [was Re: PATCH Draft]


What would be the rationale for this?

- James

Larry Masinter wrote:
> I suggest multipart/byteranges as the basis for a possible MTI format for
> partial updates.
> 
> 
> 
> 
Received on Thursday, 28 June 2007 19:01:07 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 06:50:10 GMT