RE: Minutes Delta-V breakout meeting 14-Dec-00

I'm afraid I'm a little confused, perhaps it's just the indenting.  Is the
<versions> tag supposed to be inside each the property name tags, or
parallel to them?

I'd suggest one only needs one <versions> tag per PROPFIND body, because
it's pretty nonsensical to ask for one property over 5 versions, and a
different property over 50 versions, all in one request. the client is more
likely to make separate requests.

Another suggestion is to reuse the "range" syntax and logic (e.g. byte-range
headers).  This allows a "last-n" selection, as well as "m through n" or
"first n".  Then we don't need to define custom syntax or logic to pick
which versions to show.

The basic idea, I think, is sound.

lisa
  -----Original Message-----
  From: ietf-dav-versioning-request@w3.org
[mailto:ietf-dav-versioning-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Jim Amsden
  Sent: Sunday, December 17, 2000 7:26 AM
  To: ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org
  Subject: RE: Minutes Delta-V breakout meeting 14-Dec-00



  <lisa>
  Hmm, this really argues for using PROPFIND since the client can say what
  props they want for the version.  Perhaps instead of using attributes in
the
  body of PROPFIND request (I never really understood where they would go)
  there could just be an XML element to tell the server whether the client
  wanted version detail or not:

  PROPFIND thisresource

  <?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>
    <propfind xmlns="DAV:">
      <versions>show-last-five</D:versions>
      <prop>
           <creator-displayname/>
           <checkin-date/>
      </prop>
    </propfind>
  </lisa>
  <jra>Lisa, here's what we were planning:

  <?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>
    <propfind xmlns="DAV:">
      <prop>
           <creator-displayname/>
                <versions>show-last-five</D:versions>
           <checkin-date/>
               <versions>show-last-five</D:versions>
      </prop>
    </propfind>

  This is more compatible with 2518.