[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
CALSCH: Jabber full log (short)]
(22:18:50) hardie: We've started.
(22:18:53) hardie: Anyone remote?
(22:19:10) cyrus_daboo: yes
(22:19:14) DougRoyer: Remote from here - everywhere - I am in Idaho.
(22:19:59) hardie: Lisa volunteers to scribe into the jabber room
(22:21:19) Lisa D: Hello calsch'ers
(22:21:46) Lisa D: Slide: agenda includes WG status, proposed charter
revision, CAP, other...
(22:22:31) Lisa D: Bob: sent charter to DL already
(22:23:21) Lisa D: Bob: charter includes finishing CAP, our main
(22:24:15) Lisa D: Bob: need to find people to help complete that work
(22:25:00) Lisa D: Ted: we should definitely have charter milestones in
future, not in past.
(22:25:11) Lisa D: Ted: but you need to make sure you have document
authors for all milestones
(22:26:21) Lisa D: Ted: It would also be good to know if there are
people actually wanting to implement CAP
(22:26:43) DougRoyer: I know that I, Novel, and Oracle are implementing.
(22:27:32) cyrus_daboo: I'm more interested in the WebDAV (CALDAV)
solution in the short term and perhaps CAP later...
(22:28:11) DougRoyer: And I think Sun
(22:29:18) hardie: me: thanks.
(22:29:50) hardie: Lisa: OSAF (her future employers) seems to feel that
CAP is not suited to their client model (smart client)
(22:30:53) Lisa D: Bob also said (before my comment) that UWashington
was implementing a server
(22:31:27) hardie: Nathaniel: IBM is not currently implementing, no
indication that MSoft is.
(22:32:05) hardie: Are these all server implmentations?
(22:32:23) hardie: asks lisa
(22:32:26) DougRoyer: I will have clients
(22:33:19) Lisa D: Bob: So that's some implementations, tho perhaps not
as much as we'd like
(22:33:47) Lisa D: Bob: a significant lack of implementors might lead us
to decide not to continue work on CAP - I don't think this constitutes
(22:34:09) DougRoyer: Many will wait until the spec is RFC status.
(22:34:12) Lisa D: Bugzilla repository exists to manage CAP issues
(22:34:22) Lisa D: (that was still bob)
(22:34:56) Lisa D: Bob: it's hard to create a bugzilla bug that just
says "there are major flaws"
(22:35:16) DougRoyer: Its harder to fix that bug.
(22:35:36) cyrus_daboo: So what are the major flaws?
(22:35:44) nsb: Yeah, it's actually pretty *easy* to create the bug
(22:35:45) Lisa D: Bob: Anybody want to raise further issues with CAP here?
(22:36:17) Lisa D: Bob: There are known CAP issues but they're on the
list, I don't think they need to be repeated here.
(22:36:38) DougRoyer: Perhaps someone can accept the task of filing them?
(22:37:12) Lisa D: Nathaniel (NSB) is at the mic - "I feel Lisa put her
finger on something important -- the lack of model"
(22:37:30) Lisa D: NSB: The more I think about it, the more I think the
cal server is a simple store -- but that's nothing like what we've got
(22:38:17) Lisa D: Bob: I wasn't here when CAP was originally conceived
-- I don't know if its state is due to deliberate design tradeoffs or
accident. Mabye that doesn't matter much now
(22:38:20) nsb: My comments are only partly about CAP, by the way -- I
think ical in general suffers from this lack of clarity
(22:39:22) DougRoyer: iCal (and CAP) are much more complex than
'calendaring' what looks like bloat is the supported needed for real
time scheduling (in CAP) and coordination in all of iCal
(22:39:27) Lisa D: Bob: I'm inclined to have a short last call in the WG
and hand it to the IESG for future disposition.
(22:40:15) Lisa D: Bob: Unless the ADs want to comment on that readiness...
(22:40:51) Lisa D: Ted: To address a previous question, there is no
requirement for demonstrated interoperability to go forward
(22:41:02) Lisa D: Ted: there is a requirement for real review, ideally
(22:41:19) Lisa D: Ted: "Silence = consent" is problematic. I encourage
you to require a minimum of N reviews.
(22:41:44) Lisa D: Ted: and corral people into doing them. Make sure
that what you send up, even if it's not the be-all-end-all in this
space, there are contributions it can make to this.
(22:42:57) DougRoyer: CAP is so big, people want to wait until we say it
And I AGREE - implementors - those are the ones that will find issues.
(22:43:18) Lisa D: Bob: We're adjourned.
Doug Royer | http://INET-Consulting.com
Doug@xxxxxxxxx | Office: (208)520-4044
http://Royer.com/People/Doug | Fax: (866)594-8574
| Cell: (208)520-4044
We Do Standards - You Need Standards
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature