- From: Tim Ellison <Tim_Ellison@uk.ibm.com>
- Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2001 09:19:35 +0100
- To: "'DeltaV'" <ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org>
"John Hall" <johnhall@xythos.com> wrote: > -----Original Message----- > From: John Hall [mailto:johnhall@evergo.net] > Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2001 2:25 PM > To: 'Clemm, Geoff'; 'DeltaV' > Subject: RE: REPORTS > > > Tim, I have an email folder where I keep all the message > traffic. I do not have that message. I have a message where > you replied on 8/14/01, but I don't have the original. I > don't know what could have happened to it. Sorry, can't help you there<g> > This is NOT a simple recursion, at least not on my server. I'm not implying that it is, but reporting my view of the opinion expressed in the meeting. > Version-tree is just a propfind -- for client and server. > Expand-property is a complete rewrite -- for client and > server. I probably spent an hour or two on version-tree, and > a client would need less. Expand-property is at least 2 > orders of magnitude more difficult (at least on my server). Ok, but with the greatest respect that is not a good enough reason to object to the spec. Clearly it is technically possible becuase a number of others have either already implemented it without too much pain, or did not object on the grounds of technical difficulty. > I do know you will find several refereneces to > expand-property by me -- all indicating that there was > absolutely no plans for implementation of that optional > report in my server. I don't see how moving this can be > considered 'by consensus'. There were no objections raised in the meeting or when the minutes were published. I'd consider that a consensus. From RFC2418 "Working Group Guidelines": 'The core rule for operation is that acceptance or agreement is achieved via working group "rough consensus".' 'Note that 51% of the working group does not qualify as "rough consensus" and 99% is better than rough.' > It was considered OPTIONAL before, it still should be. At a > minimum, change the SHOULD to a MAY. How does this help? They are both imply the functionality is optional. Regards, Tim
Received on Thursday, 6 September 2001 04:51:15 UTC