W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org > April to June 2001

RE: label header (was: Re: Versioning TeleConf Agenda, 4/6/01 (Fr iday) 12-1pm EST)

From: Clemm, Geoff <gclemm@rational.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 18:21:34 -0400
Message-ID: <3906C56A7BD1F54593344C05BD1374B1018E234E@SUS-MA1IT01>
To: ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org

   From: Eric Sedlar [mailto:Eric.Sedlar@oracle.com]

   Take the word 'schon' in German, which can also be spelled
   'schoen'.  There is a convention that specifies that umlauts can
   be replaced by a following "e" and still be the same word.  It is
   not the case that binary comparisons can be done even for equality
   for natural language strings.

   However, your point is still valid--I thought the reasons to get
   rid of the Label header were:

   * make label just a property and remove an option, simplifying
     the client testing problem

I don't think we proposed removing the LABEL method that updates
the value of the label property, did we?  In particular, there
are several folks that object to having a non-protected property
that when updated has a side-effect on another non-protectected
property (i.e. the label properties on two different version
resources of the same version history).

Also, once we use the "package" approach, whether or not the
label is a separately identifiable feature doesn't matter as
long as it is bundled into a package with the other advanced

But simplifying testing is certainly an issue, since there are
all the interactions of the Label header with various methods
that would have to be tested.

   * shorten the spec


   * nobody at the working group cared that much about the header

It's true that none of the folks that care were at that meeting, but I
don't think we believed that nobody cared.  Currently, it does look
like just a few people care (about the Label header, that is ...
several people care about the label feature).

   * avoid the language pain in the a** with respect to internationalizing
	   the header
   The language issue isn't sufficient by itself.

My preference was affected by all the issues you describe, but
it was the internationalization issues that tipped my vote for
removing the Label header.

Received on Tuesday, 10 April 2001 18:20:34 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:55:46 UTC