W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org > October to December 2000

RE: Labelling support optional

From: Fay, Chuck <CFay@filenet.com>
Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2000 14:45:15 -0800
Message-ID: <C3AF5E329E21D2119C4C00805F6FF58F055C184F@hq-expo2.filenet.com>
To: Lisa Dusseault <lisa@xythos.com>, "James J. Hunt (by way of \"Ralph R. Swick\" <swick@w3.org>)" <jjh@ira.uka.de>, ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org
FileNET is a vendor of web content management and document management
products, but not software source code management products.  We agree that
the LABEL feature in DeltaV should be optional, not core, because our
customers don't require such a feature in every system.

Our products allow customers to configure custom properties that could
include a label-like string property, but it would have only limited
server-side semantics such as string data typing and, optionally, a
constrained set of value choices.  It would not be appropriate to require it
in every FileNET system.

--Chuck Fay 
FileNET Corporation, 3565 Harbor Blvd., Costa Mesa, CA 92626 
phone:  (714) 327-3513, fax:  (714) 327-5076, email:  cfay@filenet.com

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Lisa Dusseault [mailto:lisa@xythos.com]
> Sent: Friday, December 01, 2000 8:57 AM
> To: James J. Hunt (by way of "Ralph R. Swick" <swick@w3.org>);
> ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org
> Subject: Labelling support optional
> 
> 
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: "James J. Hunt" <jjh@ira.uka.de>
> > To: ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org
> >
> > Labels in DeltaV
> > ================
> >
> > One of the recent changes in DeltaV was to remove labels 
> from the core
> > versioning part and put them into the options part of the protocol.
> > We strongly suggest to undo this change.  Even if there exist two or
> > three revision control systems that do not use labels, labels are
> > essential for identifying sets of associated files in a 
> repository of
> > versions.  And, actually, they are really easy to implement
> > (especially on top of a WebDAV implementation that requires built-in
> > mechanisms for property storage).
> 
> Your assumption here is that there ARE associated files in a 
> repository of
> versions.  Why need there be?  There are repositories of 
> documents -- like
> mine at http://www.sharemation.com/~milele/public -- which 
> have versions but
> aren't associated with each other.
> 
> Are you implementing a revision control system for source 
> code?  That could
> be the disconnect between us.  When repositories are not 
> intended for source
> control, but just for ordinary documents, they require far 
> fewer features.
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/ietf-dav-versioning/2000Oc
> tDec/0062.html
>
> If LABEL was a simple property, I wouldn't care, but since it's a complex
> property plus a new method to modify the set of labels, I'd rather it be
> optional.
> 
> Let me put it this way.  What would you like to accomplish that can't be
> accomplished if labeling is in the optional part of the protocol?
> 
> Lisa
> 
> 
> 
Received on Friday, 1 December 2000 17:50:08 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 13:57:39 GMT