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

RE: DAV:precursor-set property

From: Clemm, Geoff <gclemm@rational.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2001 00:07:30 -0400
Message-ID: <3906C56A7BD1F54593344C05BD1374B10350AD7D@SUS-MA1IT01>
To: ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org
I just wanted to verify that there still was somebody out there
who was willing to stand up for it.  There actually was consensus
reached a while back that this property merited inclusion in the
protocol.  So now that one of the supporters has spoken up,
once it is clarified that COPY sets the DAV:precursor-set 
property to be the URL of the version (as opposed to, appending
that URL to the existing contents of the DAV:precursor-set),
are there any implementation objections to making this a
required property?  As Tim pointed out, we only make something
optional if it truly presents an implementation barrier, not
just because a particular client isn't planning on using it.


-----Original Message-----
From: Rick Rupp [mailto:rick.rupp@merant.com]
Sent: Monday, June 18, 2001 8:39 PM
To: ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org
Subject: [ietf-dav-versioning] <none>

The precursor-set property seems to be an important concept of a versions 
history. Without it there is no indication that a version has a 
relationship to another version history.

I don't think it will be unusual for a client to create a new version by 
copying from a different version history. Will it be important to know the 
new version came from a different version history? I think the answer is 
yes and the precursor-set facilitates this.
Received on Tuesday, 19 June 2001 00:09:51 UTC

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