> I want to have some chance at multi-vendor interoperability.
> If we don't specify how the protocol allows a configuration
> database to be manipulated, then developers won't know what
> to code. We have a set of operations (create, modify, merge,
> replace, delete) with well understood semantics. I don't
> see how this is a CLR.
I agree that we need to specify the type of update.
I understand create and delete.
I don't understand the difference between replace, modify, and merge.
Is replace just a delete following by a create? If so why not eliminate it.
I think we need the equivalent of the SQL "update" which I guess is modify or merge but I don't understand the difference between those two. Also, to use existing industry terminology why not use the keyword "update".
Regards, /gww