Subject: New AtomPubIssuesList for 2004/07/16

From: Sam Ruby <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2004 16:44:01 -0400

http://www.intertwingly.net/wiki/pie/AtomPubIssuesList

Now that things are calming down again, I'm resuming the scheduling of 
issues.  This round, I've scheduled two major areas (one in the format, 
one in the protocol), and one minor item.

For the format, there is a number of issues related to autodiscovery. 
Key to this is deciding if autodiscovery is something that the workgroup 
wants to take on, and if so, should it be a separate RFC.  Part of this 
discussion also involves the comparison of URIs, something that appears 
at first to be deceptively simple, but in reality can be complicated if 
we let it be.

For the protocol, I've scheduled PaceResource and 
PaceSimpleResourcePosting.  In reality, there are quite a few related 
issues, but it seems to me that the core issue is whether or not it will 
the ability to post a naked binary object is a desirable feature.  The 
hope is that a stake in the ground on this smaller question is both 
possible without first resolving the larger issue, and if so, will help 
in the resolution of the larger issues.

I've also scheduled PaceUriOrItsSuccessor.  This is complete and hasn't 
yet drawn any competing proposals.

Also, I'm requesting that PaceUseBrokenLinkSyntaxEverywhere be closed. 
Its title leads one to believe that the proposal is not serious, and its 
creation was not announced on the mailing list.

- Sam Ruby

---

From: Sam Ruby <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2004 18:04:30 -0400

Sam Ruby wrote:

Oops, the subject line was wrong.

---

From: Martin Duerst <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2004 07:43:12 +0900

>yet drawn any competing proposals.

I am ready to produce a full competing proposal (I have already
started at http://intertwingly.net/wiki/pie/PaceIRI) once the
issues with file names on the Wiki are fixed. Sam, you said you
would look into these, and fix it on a weekend, any success?

Regards,    Martin.

---

From: Sam Ruby <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2004 19:05:54 -0400

Martin Duerst wrote:
>> I've also scheduled PaceUriOrItsSuccessor.  This is complete and 
>> hasn't yet drawn any competing proposals.
> 

Fair enough... I'm put PaceUriOrItsSuccessor back on the revisit list 
and captured the need to reconcile it with PaceIRI.

I'm travelling at the moment, but I'll try to look into this when I get 
back home.

- Sam Ruby