> It seems as if there should be an issue on > the RFC 2518 list for everything we flag in > the advanced collections drafts as inconsistent > with RFC 2518. In effect, we are requesting > a change to RFC 2518 for each of these. > > (If you are waiting to see which of these actually > survive last call on the advanced collections > drafts before adding them to the issues list, OK.) Well, I agree with you that these do need to be noted on the RFC 2518 issues list (currently maintained at: http://www.ics.uci.edu/pub/ietf/webdav/protocol/issues.html), but I also feel we should wait until the advanced collections spec. has passed last call. - JimReceived on Monday, 25 October 1999 15:38:32 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:43:52 GMT