Re: [Fwd: CAP-12 - interm version 'A']

Mark noted on 09/08/2003 05:31:41 PM:
> Just looking at your own diff file and doing some math:
> 
> Some one cut out many diffs and header/footer from your diff so I am
> guessing to some of these numbers.

I said I sent the trimmed diff output to Pat which she hosted.    I also 
said how I calculated my numbers so go reread the postings again.

The unedited diff output is ~614K.  The trimmed down (no TOC & fewer 
headers/footers) one is ~505K.  In order to be clear about all of the 
changes Ive sent Pat the unedited copy to host also.  Both should be 
available once Pat has a chance to put it up on her web site and post the 
URL.

> (142) were footer changed and would have changed
> anyway because the date of the draft changed.
> That Bruce finds it necessary to comment about on this list.
> 
> (147) were because the expire date changed on header
> and elsewhere and would have changed anyway.
> That Bruce finds it necessary to comment about on this list.

Since you had time to go thru the diff output at least to do some math on 
the changes, why is that so hard for Doug to do it? 

Its easier to make progress if he did it for everyone instead of asking 
everyone to do it individually and then comment on the changes they may or 
may not find.

One thing though, the footer/headers counted together actually:

===========================================================================
***************************** draft-ietf-calsch-cap-10-17Feb03.txt, Line 
54
Royer, Babics, Hill, Mansour    Expires May 4, 2003             [Page 1]

Internet-Draft       Calendar Access Protocol (CAP)        November 2002
*********************************** draft-ietf-calsch-cap-12-a.txt, Line 
54
Royer, et al.          Expires February 28, 2004                [Page 1]

Internet-Draft       Calendar Access Protocol (CAP)          August 2003

so no double dipping out of the count there...

> That is about (293) utterly nontechnical changes so far that would
> have changed anyway just by releasing a new version.
> That Bruce finds it necessary to comment about on this list.
>
> That leaves about (414) changes.

Actually its 707 - 3 for the TOC and - ~148 for the headers/footers which 
leaves ~550 changes.

> About (100) typos that were fixed - double words, missing words,
> spelling
> errors and wrong words.
> And Bruce does not comment on or care about on this list.

Thats because the first non-TOC / header / footer changes were either LWSP 
changes (to the boilerplate) or all of Section 1 and a block of 1.1 were 
considered 1 diff:

===========================================================================
**************************** draft-ietf-calsch-cap-10-17Feb03.txt, Line 
247
********************************** draft-ietf-calsch-cap-12-a.txt, Line 
227
1. Introduction

   This document specifies how a Calendar CUA interacts with a CS to
[Snip,snip, snip]
   capitalized, quoted-strings of text. For example, "REPLY" refers to
   the method for replying to a "REQUEST".

When I see large blocks of reported changes I just have to step back and 
wonder what the heck changed.  Im not about to play "hunt the change" in 
~50 lines of text just to find if its LWSP changes or content changes. 

> That leaves about (314) changes.
[Snip, snip]
> (1) change to the security considerations.
>     And Bruce does not comment on or care about on this list.

Good.  You managed to identify 18 actual changes out of the 450+ 
differences let that were not TOC / header / footer (assuming your 100 
count above was correct) .  Thats a good start although not a very good 
ratio for signal to noise, about 4%.

Why is it that Doug could not have given us this tally?  You should ask 
him next time you talk w/him since he is not keen on actually answering 
questions about it here.

> So you want to complain if he waits for lots of changes.

Did I?  Actually Ive been questioning the frequency of revision w/the 
amount of discussed and resolved issues and thats just the opposite of 
what you claim.

I have merely raised a flag at the amount of changes reported by diff (as 
requested be used by Doug).  Considering the lack of discussion on the 
real technical issues and the number of changes found it was not 
unwaranted.  Unliked by you and Doug yes but not unwaranted.

You are merely Dougs proxy (or his alter ego) and are taking the focus off 
the issues in CAP and Doug.  How about focusing on the raised issues for a 
while since you have so much energy? 

I stand by my diff output and the concerns Ive raised. 

Oh by the way, would you mind posting citations of the 18 actual changes 
to the group for the benefit of those who dont have the cycles to find 
them?

Bruce
===========================================================================
Bruce Kahn                                INet: 
[email protected]
Messaging & Collaboration                 Phone: 978.399.6496
IBM Software Group                         FAX: and nothing but the FAX...
Standard disclaimers apply, even where prohibited by law...