Hello Peter,

On Tue, 29 Sep 2009 15:46:18 -0600, Peter Saint-Andre <[email protected]>
wrote:

> That's a lot of changes. Can we allow the changes in 1.1 to settle for a
> while before we make further edits? Are the modifications you propose
> spec errata, protocol optimizations, niceties instead of necessities,
> solutions to security problems, etc.?

I believe that "a" (server push in "itemremove") is spec errata, "d" (end
points in range commands) might be spec text clarification (not sure where
it belongs in your list ;-), while all other changes are more like
"protocol/usage case optimizations".

You (or smb else) might want to disagree with my classification, though
(in fact, even with the whole idea of these changes being necessary) - to
hear others opinions on the issues mentioned is why I put it on the list in
the first place: maybe nobody else sees these issues as issues at all ...

-- 
Good luck!                                     Alexander

Reply via email to