On Aug 20, 2007, at 2:55 AM, Jari Urpalainen wrote:
Hi all!
I've updated <http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-urpalainen-
sip-xcap-diff-event-02.txt>. Element & attribute subscriptions were
moved to i-d: <http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-
simple-xcap-diff-06.txt>. Resource selections are done by a flat
URI list with the XCAP resource list format instead of the "path"
header parameter, and some text nits have been done. The somewhat
controversial initial sync problem still exists when patches are
aggregated. It is however, proposed that we live with that now as
it is a corner case which still can be handled with the proposed
approach,
any comments ?
br, Jari
C'mon kids, OMA is quite reasonably busting my chops because the lack
of an xcap-diff-event is mangling their schedule for XDM, and we're a
bit late on our July milestone for WGLC here. Let's pick up the pace,
ok?
I'd like to ask the OMA to double-check that they are OK with the
current draft.
Anybody else got anything to say about this draft? Can we live with
the initial sync issue as documented? I think I'm okay with it, but
I've been reasonably happy for the last couple of revs, so it's other
people that we need to hear from.
If we're all happy, I'd like to get this renamed as a WG draft and on
the working-group last-call schedule ASAP.
--
Dean
_______________________________________________
Sip mailing list https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip
This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol
Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for questions on current sip
Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for new developments on the application of sip
