At 10:34 PM +0100 3/1/05, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote:
--On lørdag, februar 26, 2005 21:22:36 -0800
Christian Huitema
<huitema(_at_)windows(_dot_)microsoft(_dot_)com> wrote:
In fact, we only have two points of contentions: old personal drafts
submitted as version 00 of WG drafts; and old WG drafts submitted as
version 00 of new personal drafts.
now that we know that the secretariat keeps
track of drafts that claim to obsolete another
draft, we could make this Real Simple:
drafts that say they obsolete another draft get the later deadline.
Harald (who won't have to decide that)
That would only work if it was "said" in metadata that can be automatically
verified.
Brian
Isn't that the point of a non-00 version number,
and that can be verified by looking inside the
document at the change log I suggested which
tells you the previous I-Ds, and their existence
can be independently verified. And for the truly
paranoid, one could do an exhaustive search of
all ID-s to assure that only one I-D is claiming
descent from any given ancestor. (Under what I
suggested, -00 is only used for new, fresh,
drafts, and changes of name DO NOT reset the
version number to 00.)
--
David Singer
Apple Computer/QuickTime
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf