- From: Jim Davis <jrd3@alum.mit.edu>
- Date: Sun, 09 Jun 2002 23:15:52 -0700
- To: <www-webdav-dasl@w3.org>
At 09:23 AM 5/28/2002 +0200, Julian Reschke wrote: >This issue is in because I wanted to find out whether there are others who >consider this a problem. I haven't seen any mail from anyone else who considers this a problem. Have you? If not, then could we close the issue (leaving things as they are?) >An >alternative of course is to move QSD into a separate document to be >submitted later - I think everybody agrees that SEARCH is useful even if QSD >isn't in the base RFC. Is your distaste for this feature so strong that we'd have to toss out all of QSD? I am willing to sacrifice QSD to get DASL approved, but this seems like a weak reason to throw away QSD. For the record, I also think it's weird, and I am the one designed it. But I could not find a better solution. Unless you can, can we agree to leave this in?
Received on Monday, 10 June 2002 02:15:52 UTC