[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: CAP-12 - interm version 'A'

Doug wrote on 09/04/2003 01:25:39 PM:
> See my other post on the above issue. Hint - compare the text
> and not the formatting of the text. NOTHING CHANGED except
> the formatting as mandated by the IETF.

Somehow I dont think the IETF mandated you remove a space or two from the biolerplate or from some random sentences in the drafts.

Im not hand comparing the 140+ page drafts to find content differences just because your tool mangles whitespace!  Im using diff and windiff (a GUI diff for those w/Windows) and relying on them to do the right thing just like the WG relys on the editor to provide drafts that do not contain undiscussed changes.

> What Bruce posted came to me as a LARGE JPG looking object that was
> unreadable. I assumed it was an error. Perhaps it requires a vendor
> specific tool that I did not have to view.

Actually its the graphical differences that windiff uses in conjuction with displaying content.  For those of us w/Windows its a handy way to judge overall changes; the less color you see, the less changes there were.  

As I said before, diff (not some custom tool) reported 707 differences and windiff shows it graphically (as well as side by side but I didnt include that).  

> And many of the bugs/fixes where covered in the few bugs filed
> (of which had many entries):

> I track many of the issues with the MOZILLA/BUGZILLA tool:

Umm, I just checked that bugzilla and it doesnt have lots of comments or issues listed that were raised here nor does it have several of the OOB typos/fixes I sent you over the past year or so.  I saw George Barnes postings (2) and a couple questions by Satay (2) and some non-CAP related posts (Bugs 26-28).

I do not see any of the comments / issues such as stored queries, scoping of searches, busytime searches, etc. that were raised in the past few months.  

In addition, discussion of issues is done on the list and typically its the editors job to track raised issues to ensure they get addressed; not the WG's job to use a tool like bugzilla to report and track them.  If you want to make use it to track issues, great.  But I thinks its unreasonable to expect those that raise issues on the list to also have to put them into your bugzilla in order for them to be addressed.

Bruce Kahn                                INet: Bruce_Kahn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Messaging & Collaboration                 Phone: 978.399.6496
IBM Software Group                         FAX: and nothing but the FAX...
Standard disclaimers apply, even where prohibited by law...