Re: Call for Two Year Feature Freeze -- to httpRange-14 resolution

A little more operational detail please. Are you saying leave the 2005
resolution, which has caused so much strife, untouched? Or have the
TAG publish a document codifying it? (I can understand if you don't
like mine, maybe another one.) Start down Rec track with it? Do you
disagree with my suggestion to strengthen the resolution to replace
"information resource" with "content" or "instance", to try to end at
least some of the suffering and deal with the Flickr case? Why is this
change proposal different from, and superior to, the other
always-content proposals already submitted, see
http://www.w3.org/wiki/TagIssue57Responses ? What will be different in
two years? Can you provide URIs relevant to the read/write idea and
explain how it relates?

Thanks
Jonathan

On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 2:13 PM, Melvin Carvalho
<melvincarvalho@gmail.com> wrote:
> In line with:
>
> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/uddp/change-proposal-call.html
>
> Calls for : "Reinforcement of the status quo".
>
> The proposal simply states, what the title says, and calls for a two year
> feature freeze on this issue
>
>
>
> Benefits
> =======
>
> - Continued meteoric rise of the web of documents
>
> - Continued emergence of linked data
>
> - A chance for nascent read/write, web of applications, to come into
> fruition, based on existing arch
>
>
> Costs
> =====
>
> - Potential continued performance issues for those that choose to deploy the
> 303 pattern
>
>
>
> *Disclaimer* my suggestion is based on work done in the W3C Read Write Web
> Community group, but are my personal opinion, and do not necessarily reflect
> the views of that group.
>
> Thanks
> Melvin
>

Received on Thursday, 29 March 2012 21:41:29 UTC