W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-dist-auth@w3.org > July to September 1997

RE: Protocol draft scehdule

From: Jim Whitehead <ejw@ics.uci.edu>
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 1997 14:53:34 -0400
Message-ID: <01BCC1E7.27F05800.ejw@ics.uci.edu>
To: "'Sankar Virdhagriswaran'" <sv@crystaliz.com>
Cc: "'w3c-dist-auth@w3.org'" <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>
Or to paraphrase, "what's up with versioning?"

I feel there is a 2-3 week window right now where, if a versioning proposal 
was sent out to the list, and if this proposal then received sufficient 
discussion in the next few months to cause convergence, it could 
conceivably go out in the current protocol draft.  However, I felt this was 
more likely not to happen than likely to happen, and hence I didn't put 
versioning into the schedule.  In the event versioning does not appear in 
the first protocol draft, it will then become a second draft, with a likely 
completion date of next April.  The new requirement to have convergence 
with the DRP effort also adds a new schedule risk for versioning within 
WebDAV.

No matter when a new proposal on versioning is developed, it will have 
dependencies on properties, collections, and locking, so work on these 
aspects of draft-ietf-webdav-protocol-02 moves versioning closer to 
completion.

- Jim

On Monday, September 15, 1997 2:05 PM, Sankar Virdhagriswaran 
[SMTP:sv@crystaliz.com] wrote:
>  Jim,
>
> In this schedule what I am not sure of is how the issues brought up 
w.r.to:
>
> a) variants
> b) configurations, and
> c) deltas
>
> will be addressed.
>
> In all of these issues there seem to be lot of discussion on the topic 
and
> no resolution or proposal for action is arrived at.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jim Whitehead <ejw@ics.uci.edu>
> To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>
> Date: Friday, September 12, 1997 3:52 PM
> Subject: Protocol draft scehdule
>
>
>
> >Here is my current proposed schedule for completion of the WebDAV 
protocol
> >document.
> >
> >Sept. 24
> >New draft with updates to collections and namespace operations based on
> >Orem, Munich, list feedback (-03 draft)
> >
> >Oct. 10
> >New draft with updates to lock operations based on Orem, Munich, list
> >feedback
> >
> >Oct. 31
> >Draft with no TBDs (i.e., i18n and security sections included)
> >
> >Nov. 12th (right before last call for December IETF)
> >New draft which includes feedback from list on previous drafts
> >
> >December 8-12, Washington, DC IETF
> >Resolve final issues
> >Informal poll to determine if we're close to consensus
> >
> >Dec. 19
> >New draft incorporating feedback from December IETF meeting.
> >
> >Jan. 5
> >Start working group last call
> >
> >Jan. 23
> >End working group last call
> >
> >Jan. 30
> >New draft incorporating changes identified during the WG last call
> >Call for consensus
> >
> >At this point, either iterate through another WG last call period, or
> >forward specification to the IESG.  Either way, the protocol 
specification
> >will be sent off to the IESG in February.
> >
> >- Jim
Received on Monday, 15 September 1997 15:18:16 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:43:43 GMT