Subject: Re: Quota draft issues from Atlanta WG mtg.

From: Jim Luther <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 15:44:49 -0800

On Wednesday, November 27, 2002, at 06:46 PM, Lisa Dusseault wrote:
>
>
> The quota draft was very briefly discussed in the WG meeting 
> inAtlanta. 
>
> ...
>
> The second open issue was whether to rename the property names from 
> “*-bytes” to “*-octets”.  The consensus of the attendees was not to 
> bother.

I still think "octets" is more accurate and that is a good reason to 
use "octets" instead of "bytes".

- Jim

---

From: Elias Sinderson <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2002 16:57:11 -0800

I agree, but at the very least a footnote should define bytes as 8-bit 
bytes... It seems trivial, but I'd wager that at least one 
implementation will be saved a lot of headache by this simple definition.

Elias

Jim Luther wrote:

>> The quota draft was very briefly discussed in the WG meeting inAtlanta. 
>> ...

---

From: Jim Luther <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 17:03:41 -0800

I'd be very surprised if anyone has shipped an implementation using the 
"*-bytes" property names yet (I know Apple hasn't because we're waiting 
for a consensus on the issues), so this is probably the best time to 
make a name change.

- Jim

On Monday, December 2, 2002, at 04:57 PM, Elias Sinderson wrote:

>>> inAtlanta. ...