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

RE: re-use of version URL's

From: Mark A. Hale <mark.hale@interwoven.com>
Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2001 17:14:37 -0800
To: <ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org>
Message-ID: <FCEJIPPGHGNPMFLDIMEFIEOBCHAA.mark.hale@interwoven.com>
I appreciate the efforts to try to get an understanding and Lisa
re-characterizing the human-readable issue.

Perhaps there is some common ground in the version-controlled resource URL

There appears to be agreement in the fact that we want URL's to have
longevity.  Furthermore, this longevity applies to what I want to classify
as resources that can be baselined.  (Since I am new to WebDAV, I hope that
I am not opening up a can of worms by using the term 'baseline'.  In the
context here, it is a resource that is stable and has longevity).

There are implementation possibilities where version URL's can be reused. (I
am not trying to judge the quality of the implementations and the impact on
either client of server functionality.  Merely an acknowledgement that these
implementations are feasible.) The example I posted earlier was centered on
the concept of a temporary space.

I propose that we instead use something to the effect 'MUST NOT re-use
version-controlled resource URL's for resources which can be baselined'.

I either made things better or worse - any suggestions?



> -----Original Message-----
> From: ietf-dav-versioning-request@w3.org
> [mailto:ietf-dav-versioning-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Lisa Dusseault
> Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2001 4:06 PM
> To: Geoffrey M. Clemm; ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org
> Subject: RE: re-use of version URL's
> I think I agree with Mark and will try to clarify for him...
> > In particular, you have a cheap way of guaranteeing unique version
> > url's by tacking a uuid to the end of the implementation name of
> > the object in your store.  This gives you a stable name for a version.
> > In addition, you have human meaningful names for versions, by
> > combining version-controlled resource URL's with version names and
> > labels.  So it looks the protocol gives you both stable names for
> > versions and human meaningful names for versions.
> Yes, you get stable URLs (names) for versions.
> Yes, you get human meaningful names, but only really for
> version-controlled resources.
> The phrase "human meaningful" is probably where the disconnect is.  If
> you consider the following human-meaningful, then you're right.  But I
> suspect Mark doesn't consider the following particularly usable.
> http://www.server.com/version-space/path/filename.ext/version2/UUID10938
> 478691283
> Lisa
Received on Thursday, 4 January 2001 20:11:53 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:55:46 UTC