- From: <edgar@edgarschwarz.de>
- Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2006 23:33:59 +0200 (MEST)
- To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
- Cc: edgar@edgarschwarz.de
Lisa Dusseault <lisa@osafoundation.org> wrote: > On Aug 4, 2006, at 12:05 AM, Suma Potluri wrote: > > Hi Julian, > > Thanks for your response. I wasn't aware of the earlier draft on > > PATCH by > > Lisa Dusseault when I submitted this latest draft. I admit that I > > should > > have done a little more research into it before submitting the new > > I-D. In > > any case, I noticed that there hasn't been much activity in this area > > since the past two years. I would be happy to collaboratively work > > with > > Lisa Dusseault or anyone else that would be interested in these > > methods, > > so that we could get something useful out of this. > That would be great. I've been letting the PATCH document languish > waiting for some broader consensus for a resolution to the question > of what Content-Type means. That's the essential difference between > patch draft -05 and draft -06. The changes made to 06 were inspired > by Jeff Mogul; I find his entity/instance model elegant in its > resolution of a few modeling problems, even if it wasn't how HTTP was > initially intended to be modeled. However, Roy Fielding has objected > to draft -06 and to Mogul's model and I didn't see a clear consensus > which way to go. After reading the old drafts and also Roys comments: - I would definitly go with Content-Type to give the diff algorithm. Please no additional header :-( - Find a simple mandatory binary diff which is free of IPR. I'm no lawyer, but could it help to use a binary diff I use for years now in an esoteric system called Oberon from ETH Zuerich. Nobody complained about it in all these years :-) Only joking, but can anybody tell me what the problem with gdiff is ? - NO APPEND. Perhaps Lisa and Suma could collaborate and provide a new draft. And if somebody decides to go to another list. Please tell me to subscribe to it :-) OTOH I think that PATCH has a special importance in the context of versioning. So perhaps it could be a good idea to find a rough consensus here before going to the HTTP jungle. Cheers, Edgar
Received on Tuesday, 15 August 2006 21:34:20 UTC