Subject: RE: Yaron.Redirect.ReallyNoBind

From: "Slein, Judith A" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2000 14:13:07 -0500

I've been pushing the hardest to keep this stuff in.  There are 2 reasons.  
 
First, it's essential that people be able to figure out whether they are
reading the right spec.  Redirect references and bindings are in the same
space, but clearly bindings will be right for some applications and redirect
references for others.  There needs to be enough information for
implementers to understand the basic differences and realize that there may
be a spec that fits their needs better than this one.
 
Second, it's often easier to communicate a concept by explaining what it is
not than by explaining what it is.  We have to do both, in my opinion.
There have been continuing requests for binding-like behavior and for
direct-reference-like behavior in redirect references.  We can stop those
requests and make it clearer what functionality we are trying to define here
by saying straight out that redirect references are not like bindings, and
here's why; and redirect references are not like direct references, and
here's why.
 
--Judy

-----Original Message-----
From: Yaron Goland [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Friday, February 11, 2000 1:31 AM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Yaron.Redirect.ReallyNoBind

The 6th and 8th paragraphs of the introduction of the redirect spec go into
a discussion of the difference between bind and redirect resources. These
sections will only serve to confuse the reader as one need understand
nothing about bind in order to successfully implement redirect. As such I
move that the sections discussing bind as compared to redirect resources be
removed.