- From: Clemm, Geoff <gclemm@rational.com>
- Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2001 09:55:49 -0400
- To: ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org
From: Peter Raymond [mailto:Peter.Raymond@merant.com]
It takes some time to understand section 14, it would have helped
if the diagram was complete and showed that /x is a Version
Controlled Collection, and that V2 of VH14 is a Collection Version.
That is probably something that would be hard to do in the final
editorial pass (the pagination would have to be changed since there
is no good place to squeeze that info into the existing diagram).
Since this is explicitly stated in the text describing the
diagram, I think I'd prefer leaving it the way it is (ASCII art
only lets you do so much before it overloads).
The current text of 10.2 says:
Collection Version Resource
A "collection version resource", or simply "collection version",
captures the content, dead properties, and version-controlled
bindings of a version-controlled collection (see Section 14). A
version-controlled binding is a binding to a version-controlled
resource.....
I propose we make this clearer and say:
Collection Version Resource
A "collection version resource", or simply "collection version",
captures the content, dead properties, and bindings to the
Version History Resources identified in the the version-controlled
bindings of a version-controlled collection (see Section 14). A
version-controlled binding is a binding to a version-controlled
resource. A binding of a collection version is a binding to a
version history resource.
The word "captures" was intended to be the flag that this was a "fuzzy"
definition, that will be firmed up in the referenced section (section 14).
But I agree we could make this clearer. How about:
A "collection version resource", or simply "collection version",
captures the content, dead properties, and version-controlled
bindings of a version-controlled collection (see Section 14). A
version-controlled binding is a binding to the version history
of a version-controlled resource.....
There is one sentence in section 14 I will also have to adjust, but
I think defining a "version-controlled binding" as a binding to a
version history would then make things clearer. What do you think?
(Also, this has the benefit of not requiring repagination :-).
Cheers,
Geoff
Received on Friday, 14 September 2001 09:56:30 UTC