Re: [VCARDDAV] Synchronization: experimental RFC?

[Marc Blanchet <[e-mail]>]

To me, the question is not the number of RFCs. One of the key issues 
that has been reported when we started working on vcard4 was about 
synchronisation. We did spent a lot of wg time trying to come to a 
solution. So to me, if we don't deliver any text on synch, then we are 
missing an important piece.

Moreover, our charter specifically talks about sync.:
") A revision of the vCard specification (RFC2426) at proposed
standard status. This revision shall include other vCard standardized
extensions (RFC 2739, 4770) and extensions assisting synchronization
technologies (for example, a per-entry UUID or per-attribute sequence
number). Other extensions shall be considered either in the base
specification or in additional documents."

Therefore, we must have sync section.

About 7.2.5, it might be not fully informative, but I would suggest that 
we should not try to be perfect for this version of vcard4, as intended 
to be Proposed Standard RFC. When more experience with implementations 
and synchronisation will be in the field, we could revisit this section 
7 and add more clues about what we found and move it to Draft Standard.

short summary: leave it as is, unless text is flawed.

Marc, as individual.

Simon Perreault a écrit :
> WG,
> 
> Is the section on synchronization (section 7) experimental? Should it be 
> moved to a separate RFC with experimental status? It has never been 
> implemented. See section 7.2.5 in particular...
> 
> It would be easy for me to do so if that is the working group's 
> consensus, so I don't care. (Actually, it would potentially result in a 
> higher RFC count for me, so I do care!)
> 
> Simon


-- 
=========
IPv6 book: Migrating to IPv6, Wiley. http://www.ipv6book.ca
Stun/Turn server for VoIP NAT-FW traversal: http://numb.viagenie.ca
DTN news service: http://reeves.viagenie.ca
NAT64-DNS64 Opensource: http://ecdysis.viagenie.ca