- From: Greg Stein <gstein@lyra.org>
- Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 04:39:20 -0800
- To: ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org
Agh... no way. This *is* a standards track document. Nothing less. On Fri, Feb 09, 2001 at 11:30:18AM +0100, Juergen Reuter wrote: > Following the recent discussion about the maturity of DeltaV, I wonder if > it might be an option to submit DeltaV as an informational RFC. On the > one hand, this might satisfy people that want to see some 'official' RFC > before starting to work on software. On the other hand, an informational > RFC is probably much easier to change than a proposed standard RFC, which > is a standard tracks document. > > Just have a look at the HTTP protocol: As of May 1996, HTTP was still > issued as informational RFC (RFC 1945), although there had been HTTP > server implementations running since 1990, i.e. for about 6 years. HTTP > switched to a proposed standard not earlier than in January 1997 (RFC > 2068). The bottom line here is, that HTTP became a proposed standard not > before there were many implementations available revealing all the > bugs and weaknesses of earlier HTTP protocol versions. In my opinion, > WebDAV suffers from this experience; and DeltaV should do it better than > WebDAV! > > Greetings, > Juergen -- Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
Received on Friday, 9 February 2001 07:37:51 UTC