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

Terms

From: James J. Hunt <jjh@allerton.de>
Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2001 01:41:11 +0000
Message-ID: <3A7A1037.71C050DE@allerton.de>
To: ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org
Dear Colleagues,

We would like to make the following points with respect to section 1.3
Terms.

1.  Can section 1.4 Notational Convention be placed before Terms?
      This would eliminate some forward references, thus making the
document easier to read.

2. Can the following sentence be added just after the first sentence in
section 1.3?
     "Note that RFC 2518 uses terms from RFC 2068 which is superseded by
RFC 2616."
      This would make it easier for someone who starts with this
document (RFC 2518).
       He or she would know immediately that RFC 2068 can be ignored.

3. The difference between "Version-Controlled Resource" and "Working
Resource" is not clear.
      In some sense, they are both working resources.  The only
difference is that
      "Working Resources" disappear after check-in and
"Version-Controlled Resources" do not.
      Confusingly,  workspaces contain version-controlled resources and
normally not working
      resources.  Can we change "Working Resource" to something like
"Client-Managed
      Resource" or "Client-Workspace Resource".  After all, the main
difference is that "Working
      Resources" are there to support client managed workspaces.  In any
event, a bit more
      description would help.  How would the following be?

      Client-workspace Resource

      A "client-workspace resource" is a modifiable copy of a version
resource used to support
      client managed workspaces.  It is similar to a
versioned-controlled resource, except that it is
      transient.  It is created by a check-out request against a version
resource and it is normally
      deleted by a check-in request.

4. The definitions of activity resource, variant resource, and
variant-controlled resource are not
    clear.  I discussions with Geoff and Jim the line was that an
activity represents both a branch
    and a change set.  That functionally they are the same.  A variant
seems to also represent a
     branch, or at least the end of one.  Actually, it seem set of
branches is a better description.
    The division does not seem very clear to us.  Can someone enlighten
me?

Thanks,
James J. Hunt
Jürgen Reuter
Received on Friday, 2 February 2001 00:01:08 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 13:57:40 GMT