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

RE: Removing the DAV:activity and DAV:version-history and DAV :baseline resource type values

From: <Tim_Ellison@uk.ibm.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2001 10:30:06 +0100
To: "DeltaV \(E-mail\)" <ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org>
Message-ID: <80256A63.003425AC.00@d06mta07.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com>


"Lisa Dusseault" <lisa@xythos.com> wrote:
> >
> > Therefore, I recommend that the DeltaV specification *keep* the
> > DAV:activity, DAV:version-history, and DAV:baseline resourcetype
values.
>
> What about "version-controlled-resource", "version" and "workspace"?
>
> It would also be nice to identify a version-controlled collection in some
> way that it's also recognizable as a collection (e.g.
>
>
<DAV:resourcetype><DAV:collection/><DAV:version-controlled-collection/></DAV

> :resourcetype>

(I'm just doing this so Geoff will change color -- too bad I shan't be
there to see it<g>)

My view of the world...

Here's the list of elements that could appear in a DAV:resourcetype.  Some
of these can be combined to provide a really meaningful experience for the
client.  Obviously, some combinations are invalid.
     <DAV:checked-in/>
     <DAV:checked-out/>
     <DAV:collection/>
     <DAV:working-resource/>
     <DAV:version-controlled-resource/>
     <DAV:version/>
     <DAV:version-history/>
     <DAV:workspace/>
     <DAV:version-controlled-configuration/>
     <DAV:baseline/>
     <DAV:activity/>

So,
<DAV:resourcetype>
     <DAV:activity/>
</DAV:resourcetype

would be good, that is, not surprisingly, an activity resource.

<DAV:resourcetype>
     <DAV:checked-out/>
     <DAV:version-controlled-resource/>
     <DAV:collection/>
     <DAV:workspace/>
</DAV:resourcetype>

would be good too, it is a checked-out, version-controlled resource for a
workspace collection.  And so on.

Tim
Received on Wednesday, 6 June 2001 05:30:37 GMT

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