Re: [VCARDDAV] Synchronization: experimental RFC?
Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> Tue, 06 April 2010 14:07 UTC
Return-Path: <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
X-Original-To: vcarddav@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: vcarddav@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 34FB93A67F4 for <vcarddav@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 6 Apr 2010 07:07:01 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.134
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.134 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.535, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7PU-hsPgUN6r for <vcarddav@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 6 Apr 2010 07:07:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.gmx.net (mail.gmx.net [213.165.64.20]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id BF9DB3A67B4 for <vcarddav@ietf.org>; Tue, 6 Apr 2010 07:06:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 06 Apr 2010 14:06:54 -0000
Received: from mail.greenbytes.de (EHLO [192.168.1.119]) [217.91.35.233] by mail.gmx.net (mp070) with SMTP; 06 Apr 2010 16:06:54 +0200
X-Authenticated: #1915285
X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX19skNsKde5s9BTnGdCB8xiHZTV1pIFEPKcsNIjJiV egmArmhQmptZpY
Message-ID: <4BBB3FFC.5050406@gmx.de>
Date: Tue, 06 Apr 2010 16:06:52 +0200
From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; de; rv:1.8.0.4) Gecko/20060516 Thunderbird/1.5.0.4 Mnenhy/0.7.4.666
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Kepeng Li <likepeng@huawei.com>
References: <4BBB344E.1090301@viagenie.ca> <00fe01cad590$e7f68460$b7e38d20$@com> <4BBB3F17.50705@gmx.de>
In-Reply-To: <4BBB3F17.50705@gmx.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0
X-FuHaFi: 0.67000000000000004
Cc: vcarddav@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [VCARDDAV] Synchronization: experimental RFC?
X-BeenThere: vcarddav@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF vcarddav wg mailing list <vcarddav.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/vcarddav>, <mailto:vcarddav-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/vcarddav>
List-Post: <mailto:vcarddav@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:vcarddav-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/vcarddav>, <mailto:vcarddav-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 06 Apr 2010 14:07:01 -0000
On 06.04.2010 16:03, Julian Reschke wrote: > On 06.04.2010 15:56, Kepeng Li wrote: >> Hi Simon and all, >> >> I would prefer that it stays in the current draft. If we separate it into an >> independent draft, there are some uncertainty, for example, delayed, >> disagreed etc. >> ... > > That sounds like a feature, not a bug. It could mean that both parts > could progress at different speed through the approval process... > ... That being said: splitting it from the base spec doesn't mean it needs to be "experimental". "Proposed Standards" doesn't require implementations, "Draft Standard" does. Best regards, Julian
- [VCARDDAV] Synchronization: experimental RFC? Simon Perreault
- Re: [VCARDDAV] Synchronization: experimental RFC? Kepeng Li
- Re: [VCARDDAV] Synchronization: experimental RFC? Florian Zeitz
- Re: [VCARDDAV] Synchronization: experimental RFC? Julian Reschke
- Re: [VCARDDAV] Synchronization: experimental RFC? Julian Reschke
- Re: [VCARDDAV] Synchronization: experimental RFC? Marc Blanchet
- Re: [VCARDDAV] Synchronization: experimental RFC? Kepeng Li
- Re: [VCARDDAV] Synchronization: experimental RFC? Robins George