Subject: Re: [VCARDDAV] Three extension drafts to consider

From: Barry Leiba <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2011 08:57:36 -0500

>> There's also one thing in particular that the first and third specs
>> bring out, in doing extensions.  Both have a property called
>> "interests".  Of course, the registry is there to make sure that there
>> aren't collisions, and that once someone grabs "xyzzy", the next guy
>> can't have that and might have to settle for "plugh".  But this is
>> different: first, the two specs are coming in at the same time, and
>> second, the two properties really are defining the same thing, and are
>> not in conflict.  The question is how to handle the case when there's
>> a common property needed by different specs.  Any ideas?
>
> Can't you have one refer normatively to the other with text such as:
> "The XYZZY property, as defined in [blah], MUST be supported."
> ?

That will certainly work OK when there's an existing, registered
property.  It may be trickier when extensions are developed at the
same time, and they have some overlapping properties.  I guess it's up
to the review process to coalesce them, and to make sure that the one
that winds up being published second makes the reference to the one
that was published first.

Barry