Re: getting WebDAV SEARCH ready for the IESG

John Barone wrote:
> First and foremost I would be in favor of wording that is consistent
> with what's outlined in section 2.3.1, for truncation.  From a client
> perspective, I would think that the MUST wording in section 5.17.1 is
> most desirable.  However, from a practical (and admittedly self-serving)
> point of view, simply stating that the results MUST ordered as the
> client directed, would be preferred.  Section 2.3.1 goes on to say:
> 
> "... the partial results returned MAY be any subset of the result set
> that would have satisfied the original query".
> 
> Perhaps in section 5.17.1 the additional sentence could be phrased:
> 
> "... the results that are included in the response document SHOULD be
> those that order highest"

So, to be precise, the single change you're proposing is to relax the 
"must" to a "should"?

I'd be ok with that.

BR, Julian