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

RE: Protected properties...

From: Tim Ellison <tim@peir.com>
Date: Sat, 2 Jun 2001 23:56:04 +0100
To: <ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org>
Message-ID: <FDEHJMOEIDFPFLBKEICGKEJJCAAA.tim@peir.com>
It's because the precursor defines the logical ancestor to the version from
a different version history.  The precursor is a resource that the client
chose to copy or merge into the working resource / checked out version
controlled resource because it made ('application') sense for them to do so;
whereas the predecessor defines the resource that was actually checked out.
This distinction was considered important.

Some systems may not support changing the value of the resource that was
actually checked out, hence the predecessor MAY be protected, however, of
course the precursor cannot have such system limitations and therefore has
no right to be protected.

Tim

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ietf-dav-versioning-request@w3.org
> [mailto:ietf-dav-versioning-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Lisa Dusseault
> Sent: 01 June 2001 20:22
> To: DeltaV
> Subject: Protected properties...
>
>
>
> DeltaV lists one property, DAV:predecessor-set, that MAY be protected on a
> checked-out resource, it's up to the implementation.  However, on
> a version,
> predecessor-set MUST be protected.  So far, so cool:  I understand that.
>
> Next, note that precursor-set is NOT protected on a checked-out resource,
> but MUST be protected on a version.  Might some implementations choose to
> protect precursor-set in all cases as well?  Why is precursor-set handled
> differently than predecessor-set?
>
> lisa
>
Received on Saturday, 2 June 2001 18:56:35 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 13:57:41 GMT