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

Re: [Bug 23] lock discovery vs shared locks

From: Cullen Jennings <fluffy@cisco.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 20:52:41 -0800
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
CC: Lisa Dusseault <lisa@osafoundation.org>, Geoffrey M Clemm <geoffrey.clemm@us.ibm.com>, WebDav <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>
Message-ID: <BFA29E19.611CC%fluffy@cisco.com>

On 11/16/05 1:41 PM, "Julian Reschke" <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote:

> an implementation
> guide instead of the spec, we may want to actually consider to start a
> document like that; and I'm volunteering to work on that. That would be
> separate from RFC2518bis, and potentially not even an IETF document
> (unless the WG would want it to be that way).

My measure of a successful protocol is that people find it useful and that
means it needs to get implemented. A "hints to implementers" document seems
all good and could be IETF document or not - I don't care as long as it
helped the adoption of the protocol by making it easier to implement.
Example flow documents have helped other groups make it easier to get
interoperable implementations.

That said, a skilled programmer still needs to be able to correctly
implement and understand the protocol by just reading the spec and things it
normatively references. The spec should help make this easy not hard. And if
there is something that in the specification that a significant percentage
of competent implementers might get wrong on the wire, the specification was
probably not clear enough. 
Received on Friday, 18 November 2005 04:52:45 GMT

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