Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-wilde-xml-patch-04.txt
Erik Wilde <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.web.services.rest,gmane.ietf.apps-discuss |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
hello. this version is almost identical with the previous one, but instead of linking to errata, the draft now is written as an update of RFC 5261. http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-wilde-xml-patch-04#appendix-A lists all the updates to the RFC, and the XML Patch draft then refers to these updates where it needs to. this should make the draft more self-contained, so that it can progress without any dependencies on errata. it also makes it easier for implementers, all they need to do is read the spec, and RFC 5261. as usual, feedback is very welcome. cheers, dret. -------- Original Message -------- Subject: New Version Notification for draft-wilde-xml-patch-04.txt Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2013 06:54:04 -0800 From: [email protected] A new version of I-D, draft-wilde-xml-patch-04.txt has been successfully submitted by Erik Wilde and posted to the IETF repository. Filename: draft-wilde-xml-patch Revision: 04 Title: A Media Type for XML Patch Operations Creation date: 2013-02-21 Group: Individual Submission Number of pages: 17 URL: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-wilde-xml-patch-04.txt Status: http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-wilde-xml-patch Htmlized: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-wilde-xml-patch-04 Diff: http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-wilde-xml-patch-04 Abstract: The XML Patch media type "application/xml-patch+xml" defines an XML document structure for expressing a sequence of patch operations that are applied to an XML document. The XML Patch document format's foundations are defined in RFC 5261, this specification defines a document format and a media type registration, so that XML Patch documents can be labeled with a media type, for example in HTTP conversations. In addition to the media type registration, this specification also updates RFC 5261 in some aspects, limiting these updates to cases where RFC 5261 needed to be fixed, or was hard to understand.