W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org > January to March 2002

RE: locate-by-history report vs. Depth header

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@greenbytes.de>
Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2002 23:42:26 +0100
To: "Clemm, Geoff" <gclemm@rational.com>, "Ietf-Dav-Versioning@W3. Org" <ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org>
Message-ID: <JIEGINCHMLABHJBIGKBCCENHECAA.julian.reschke@greenbytes.de>
> From: ietf-dav-versioning-request@w3.org
> [mailto:ietf-dav-versioning-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Clemm, Geoff
> Sent: Thursday, March 07, 2002 9:49 PM
> To: Ietf-Dav-Versioning@W3. Org
> Subject: RE: locate-by-history report vs. Depth header
> 
> 
> Actually, the report clearly makes the most sense for depth=0 (perhaps
> that's what you
> meant to type?).

You managed to confuse me :-) It the request URI is the parent collection, and the scope is the member of this collection, only depth = 1 seems to make sense. Depth 0's scope would be just the parent collection, correct?
Received on Thursday, 7 March 2002 17:42:44 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 13:57:43 GMT