W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-dist-auth@w3.org > January to March 2005

Re: ETags?

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2005 22:48:54 +0100
Message-ID: <41F178C6.4010508@gmx.de>
To: Geoffrey M Clemm <geoffrey.clemm@us.ibm.com>
CC: WebDAV WG <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>

Geoffrey M Clemm wrote:
> 
> If there were a well-defined (and finite) number of such "guidances",
> I could live with it (and it was on that basis that I reluctantly
> agreed to adding the "guidance" text about locking).
> 
> But as soon as we agree to one such "guidance", a new one is suggested.
> I despair of ever getting the BIND protocol published if it is delayed
> until it has become a complete "implementation guide".
> 
> I noticed that yet another such request for "guidance text" has just 
> been posted to the
> bug database [bug 71].  I also note that nothing in the "bug" has to
> do with any of the methods or properties defined by the binding 
> specification,
> but is about access control.
> 
> I have nothing against asking for guidance from the mailing list,
> but holding a specification hostage until all of your implementation
> issues have been addressed by the mailing list seems a bit unreasonable.  
> 
> Cheers,
> Geoff

For the record: I completely agree with that statement.

Best regards, Julian

-- 
<green/>bytes GmbH -- http://www.greenbytes.de -- tel:+492512807760
Received on Friday, 21 January 2005 21:49:35 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:44:07 GMT