Subject: RE: Issue: SOURCE_PROPERTY_UNDERSPECIFIED

From: "Clemm, Geoff" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 9 May 2002 21:01:58 -0400

OK with me.  I'd keep it if we uncovered some interoperable implementations,
but without that that, deferring it seems like the right choice.

Cheers,
Geoff

-----Original Message-----
From: Jason Crawford [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Thursday, May 09, 2002 6:52 PM
To: Lisa Dusseault
Cc: Webdav WG (E-mail)
Subject: Issue: SOURCE_PROPERTY_UNDERSPECIFIED

One of the issues Lisa brought up below was not covered in subsequent
discussions.  That issue was what to do about the source property.

In fhe following recent post

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-dist-auth/2002JanMar/0351.html

It was indicated that at the IETF meeting there was a proposal to drop the
source property.  Julian added that we can pick it up in the next version
of WebDAV.

I'd like to mark it resolved that we will remove the source property.  I
would leave it up to our memories to bring the topic up again in the next
version of WebDAV if we value it.

The thinking is...

The source property is good.
But it's under specified and needs work, no interoperability has been
determined, and no one has been yelling for it.  If we remove it from the
spec now, the few implementations that support it can remove that support
and thus provide us a clean slate to work from when we take another stab at
the source property.

Please speak up if you disagree with this or would like to add to what I've
said.

Thanks :-)

J.

------------------------------------------
Phone: 914-784-7569,   [email-masked]

                      "Lisa Dusseault"

                      <ldusseault@xytho        To:       "Webdav WG
(E-mail)" <[email-masked]>                
                      s.com>                   cc:

                      Sent by:                 Subject:  54th IETF Meeting
Information, and RFC2518 open issues      
                      w3c-dist-auth-req

                      [email-masked]

                      04/22/2002 12:36

                      PM

If you're not on the IETF-Announce list, you might not have seen this
announcement about the upcoming meeting in Yokohama.

To bring our "agenda" up-to-date, here's what I think the largest and
hardest issues are for RFC2518 bis:
 - Whether/how to change the If header rules and syntax
 - Whether/how to change the source property definition

Although the If header has been shown to be interoperable in its simplest
form with locktokens, it hasn't been shown to be interoperable in its more
advanced forms or with ETags.  The source property has not had any
demonstrated interoperability to my knowledge.

I'd like to encourage anybody with ideas on what to do with either of these
two features to make concrete proposals to the list.  If your proposal is
"leave things the way they are", I'd like to see some discussion on how to
meet the requirements for going to proposed standard (how to demonstrate
interoperability, and how much interoperability is enough).

Another ACL draft is expected before the Yokohama cut-off, therefore ACLs
will probably also be discussed in Yokohama.  I'll be asking for a meeting
slot.

Lisa

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]On
Behalf Of [email-masked]
Sent: Thursday, April 18, 2002 8:42 AM
To: IETF-Announce:
Subject: 54th IETF Meeting Information

Registration for the 54th IETF is now open.
Information can be found on the IETF web site at:
http://www.ietf.org/meetings/IETF-54.html

MEETING SITE:
Pacifico Yokohama Convention Center
1-1-1 Minato Mirai, Nishi-ku, Yokohama 220-0012 Japan
Tel: + 81 (45) 221-2112
Fax: + 81 (45) 221-2136

HOTEL ACCOMMODATIONS:
Information is available on
http://www.e-side.co.jp/ietf54/accommodation.html.
Please be advised that ONLINE RESERVATIONS will be available after April
22nd.

---

From: Stefan Eissing <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 10 May 2002 11:31:58 +0200

I agree.

//Stefan