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

RE: Re (2): Component instead of Configuration/Baseline/Component

From: Clemm, Geoff <gclemm@rational.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2001 12:58:10 -0400
Message-ID: <3906C56A7BD1F54593344C05BD1374B1018E239F@SUS-MA1IT01>
To: ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org

   From: Edgar@EdgarSchwarz.de [mailto:Edgar@EdgarSchwarz.de]

   Yesterday a posting told me that 15 is already availabe.
   (For some time already it seems if I look at the DELTA-V page).

Actually, I got the "dates" a bit wrong when I updated
the deltav page (those dates are entered by hand to the html
page)... but after I noticed it, I figured it was
close enough (at least the month was right).

   The introductory part on baselines is much clearer now.


   Nevertheless I still would like to drop 'configuration' which
   only appears in this context and replace it by 'component'.
   As Geoff seems to be neutral on this topic, I really would
   like to see at least one or two other opinions.

Yes, I am neutral.  I believe Jim Amsden was the only one who
responded so far (and he wanted to keep it "configuration",
because "component" is so overused as a term).

Just to expand a bit on my "neutrality", on one hand, the
term "configuration" emphasizes the fact that it is "a set
of things", but on the other hand, the term "component"
emphasizes the fact that this is something you can plug
in and plug out, which is exactly what you do when you
create and select different baselines for a baselined collection.

So on a purely technical basis, I probably prefer the term
"component", but on an inertial basis (i.e. we've been calling it a
configuration for a while now, and people seem OK with it), I prefer
the term "configuration".  So, either way is fine with me (:-).

Received on Thursday, 26 April 2001 12:58:53 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:55:47 UTC