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:bas eline resource type values

From: Clemm, Geoff <gclemm@rational.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2001 12:47:43 -0400
Message-ID: <3906C56A7BD1F54593344C05BD1374B1033E5A55@SUS-MA1IT01>
To: "DeltaV (E-mail)" <ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org>
If you believe there is a useful line drawn between "resource state"
and "resource type", then it is necessary to unambiguously define "state"
and
"type" (in particular, in a way that allows you to distinguish one
from the other).

Cheers,
Geoff

-----Original Message-----
From: Lisa Dusseault [mailto:lisa@xythos.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2001 12:00 PM
To: Clemm, Geoff; DeltaV (E-mail)
Subject: RE: Removing the DAV:activity and DAV:version-history and
DAV:bas eline resource type values


If you believe that whether a resource is under version control or not, is a
matter of state, then leave it OUT of resourcetype.  It's not called
"resourcestate".

Version, version History, and others are still types.

But draw a line somewhere.

lisa

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ietf-dav-versioning-request@w3.org
> [mailto:ietf-dav-versioning-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Clemm, Geoff
> Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2001 8:07 AM
> To: DeltaV (E-mail)
> Subject: RE: Removing the DAV:activity and DAV:version-history and
> DAV:bas eline resource type values
>
>
> I think Tim's point was that if "under version control"
> (e.g. "version-controlled-resource") is part of
> the "type" of a resource, then "checked-out" and "checked-in"
> would equally usefully be considered as part of the type
> (since the significantly affect what methods can be
> applied to that resource).
>
> In each case, you have the same resource (i.e. when you
> put a resource under version control, it is the same resource
> but has some additional live properties and methods you can
> apply to it).
>
> Cheers,
> Geoff
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stefan Eissing [mailto:stefan.eissing@greenbytes.de]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2001 6:27 AM
> To: DeltaV (E-mail)
> Subject: AW: Removing the DAV:activity and DAV:version-history and DAV
> :baseline resource type values
>
>
>
>
> > [mailto:ietf-dav-versioning-request@w3.org]Im Auftrag von
> > Tim_Ellison@uk.ibm.com
> > [...]
> >
> > 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/>
> >
>
> What is your rationale for checked-in/out in the type? I think
> I have missed something in the spec, since it feels like a
> property to me.
>
> > 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 12:42:58 GMT

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