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

Re: DAV:compare-baseline REPORT

From: Geoffrey M. Clemm <geoffrey.clemm@rational.com>
Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 21:28:56 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <200102100228.VAA29402@tantalum.atria.com>
To: ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org

Now that we have the DAV:baseline-collection for a baseline,
I agree that this is a much more appropriate value for the
results of this report.  In particular, I'd just return the
VCR URL from the DAV:baseline-collection (you could get the
version URL from the DAV:checked-in property, if you cared).

Does anyone object?


   From: "Boris Bokowski/OTT/OTI" <Boris_Bokowski@oti.com>
   Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 13:56:39 -0500

   This is a change request - I hope it's not too late:

   A compare-baseline REPORT only contains version URLs. This makes it very 
   painful to find out what the changes are in terms of the VCRs that are 
   exposed by the DAV:baseline-collection. I would like to see, instead of 
   version URLs being reported by the DAV:compare-baseline, the VCR URLs from 
   the corresponding DAV:baseline-collection(s).

   I would propose the following (just for the added-version case, 
   deleted-version and changed-version would be similar):

   A DAV:added-version element identifies a member of the 
   DAV:baseline-collection of the compare baseline version whose 
   DAV:checked-in version belongs to a version history from which no version 
   is the DAV:checked-in version of a member of the DAV:baseline-collection 
   of the request baseline.
   <!ELEMENT added-version (href)>
   As an alternative, both URLs could be reported (VCR and version URLs).

Received on Friday, 9 February 2001 21:30:32 UTC

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