Re: CAP-12 - interm version 'A'

[email protected] wrote:

> 
>  > Go re-read Bruces email and tell me if he has posted even ONE post
>  > that backs up (some in recent posts);
>  >
>  > (a)   ...I certainly dont recall any WG discussion on some of the bigger
>  >       issues ...
> 
> Please point to the WG thread(s) where we discussed and resolved the 
> issue of scoping on SEARCH?

Go re-read my post (a) was not about SEARCH. It was was in response
to the text you sent. Your mis quoting me again.

>  > (b)   ...Im more than a bit concerned that there are changes that creep
>  >      (additions or omissions) that should not. ...
> 
> diff reports 707 changes between CAP-10 and CAP-12-a.  Not some custom 
> tool; generic diff.  If I remove the TOC (1 big difference) and the ~140 
> headers/footers that leaves ~565 other changes of _some_ kind.  If we 
> were not discussing CAP issues over the past month or two, just where 
> did all these changes come from?  Some are pure whitespace but others 
> are NOT.  Either there were LOTS and LOTS of typos or grammar errors or 
> changs were made.

Your own assertions above conclude that you still do not know. Why
are you posting there is a problem and in the same post declaring
you did not know if there is a problem - whitespace inside of paragraphs?

There are lots of changes because there were lots of changes including
formatting of the text.

> The TOC for CAP-12-a says there are 7 fewer pages.  Unless you did some 
> unusual reformatting there is no way typos and small grammar changes can 
> account for this!  Combine this with the results from diff and its easy 
> to call changes into question (especially given your reticence to 
> provide a summary of the changes yet you have time to spin out several 
> extra CAP related drafts).

The 7 pages concerned me also. So looking at YOUR diff that Pat has hosted.
I found the answer in less than a minute. Your questions are answered
in your own diff.

> 
>  > (c)   One of the other changes Im leary of was the change in the footers:
>  >        It just looks like an attempt to give Doug more prominence ...
>  >
>  > Now do YOU honestly see ANY details in his post to substantiate his
>  > assertions?
> 
> Its hard to see the details if you dont read the posts Doug.

Is this really one of the "issues" that you fell is going to make CAP
ship before it is ready?

> 
> Umm, which version of CAP-10 was this?  We had several in Dec/Jan/Feb.  

> You clearly missed the issue of stored queries that was in active 
> discussion in Nov/Dec 2002 under the thread "What good are stored 
> VQUERYs?" of which you were a participant even.

And no consensus was called.

> You also missed the scoping issue from the thread "How do you get the 
> METHOD property on a SEARCH" in April 2003.

It was covered on the WG list. If you do not like what it does,
do you have a proposal?

> You also did not cover the issue of busy time 
> creation/searching/updating that I raised under "CAP & busytime?" in 
> March 2003 and "CAP / Busytime Restart" in April 2003.

Did it reach consensus? I did not see it called.

> Oh yeah, if that went into CAP-11 then what was the need for a CAP-12 
> and CAP-12-a so soon after CAP-11??

To post the changes so people could see what changed.

>  > The only other things that changed were formatting issues and fixes
>  > as a result in a bug in xml2rfc that for some reason left out
>  > about 3 sentences and did some odd formatting.
> 
> Then why are there so many whitespace changes unrelated to anything 
> else?  The boilerplate text alone had more than just 1 change in 
> whitespace:

As covered in the previous email. Please read the instructions
to RFC authors and RFC 2223.

> There are plenty of other non-typo changes to be found by diff too. 
>  Either they came from the Dougs fingers or from his non-standard XML 
> tool thats admittedly munges content.  Either way, there is no simple 
> way to not see them using the diff tool that Doug suggested we use.
> 
> So, if you only did typo changes an other minor grammar changes then why 
> is CAP-12-a 7 pages shorter but ~2K larger??  7 pages/~2K is a LOT for 
> no acutal substance changes no matter how you cut it.

Look in your diff - you initiated the change on this WG list that
resulted in most of that 7 pages missing.

> You want facts Ill give you some to consider in questioning Dougs motives:
> 
(Your non-productive comments and personal opinions deleted. And I did
not sort through them to see if there was anything useful).

-- 

  Doug Royer                     |   http://INET-Consulting.com
  -------------------------------|-----------------------------
  [email protected]                 | Office: (208)612-INET
  http://Royer.com/People/Doug   |    Fax: (866)594-8574
                                 |   Cell: (208)520-4044

                 We Do Standards - You Need Standards