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

Re: [Bug 172] Whether to obsolete 'opaquelocktoken', keep it, or remove it

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 02:21:57 +0100
Message-ID: <437A89B5.3020906@gmx.de>
To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org

bugzilla@soe.ucsc.edu wrote:
> http://ietf.cse.ucsc.edu:8080/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=172
> 
> lisa@osafoundation.org changed:
> 
>            What    |Removed                     |Added
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>              Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED
>          Resolution|                            |FIXED
> 
> 
> 
> ------- Additional Comments From lisa@osafoundation.org  2005-11-15 17:11 -------
> I believe we came to consensus in a phone call and thus I'm making changes in
> -08, marking this 'fixed', and the WG can confirm whether the resulting draft
> changes are acceptable.

Lisa,

this is hard to argue with unless you state what you think the consensus 
was.

My recollection is that opaquelocktoken can not obsoleted, because

a) it's in use in existing implementations and

b) its semantics is a true superset of urn:uuid.

Thus it should be kept, but it's definition can be stripped to a 
minimum, referring normatively to syntax and generation instructions in 
the URN:UUID RFC.

Best regards, Julian
Received on Wednesday, 16 November 2005 01:23:09 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:44:11 GMT