- From: Clemm, Geoff <gclemm@rational.com>
- Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2001 22:16:11 -0400
- To: ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org
I agree with Jim's position on collecting implementation experience before mutating/extending/subsetting the versioning specification. Speaking of interesting follow-on work for DeltaV, one thing we (very sensibly) defined as out-of-scope initially was "change request management". This is a core feature in all "web content management" systems, in many cases as much if not more important than versioning. This topic came up a few weeks ago (in the context of defining some "states" for an activity). This would probably be a very interesting and valuable topic to pursue as we are gaining implementation experience with the DeltaV specification. Is this of interest to anyone? Cheers, Geoff From: Jim Amsden [mailto:jamsden@us.ibm.com] I'm inclined to declare victory on our DeltaV charter and let some servers get built on what we have before we start making a lot of immediate changes. Of course I would welcome any BOF to determine level of interest in extensions, new packages, etc. DeltaV is now firmly on the standards track. The next step is to get some implementation and determine interoperability issues. If the community fragments immediately on different packages that aren't interoperable in meaningful ways, then certainly that's good information for the standards process that would need to be addressed. But I think the community would benefit from attempting to implement the spec as written so we encourage interoperability. As for shutting down DeltaV, we're only at proposed standard. We could consider updating the charter to move to the next stage in the lifecycle. I would be happy to entertain suggestions as to the content of such a charter, and if there's sufficient interest, we can propose the next set of work items to the AD's as either continuation of DeltaV (with a new charter), or other working groups focused on more specific tasks.
Received on Thursday, 18 October 2001 22:16:52 UTC