W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-dist-auth@w3.org > January to March 1997

RE: Versioning terminology

From: Yaron Goland <yarong@microsoft.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 1997 18:49:34 -0800
Message-ID: <c=US%a=_%p=msft%l=RED-44-MSG-970221024934Z-7030@INET-05-IMC.microsoft.com>
To: "'Jim Whitehead'" <ejw@ics.uci.edu>, "'w3c-dist-auth@w3.org'" <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>
Bingo bango bongo.
	Yaron
PS For those of you who are not versed in the rarified terminology of
Gilligan's Island, that means I agree.

>-----Original Message-----
>From:	Jim Whitehead [SMTP:ejw@ics.uci.edu]
>Sent:	Thursday, February 20, 1997 4:49 PM
>To:	w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
>Subject:	Re: Versioning terminology
>
>>If we let our terminology be "version tree" and "member of a version tree",
>>the requirements start looking something like this:
>>
>>4.9.2.1. Referring to a version tree. There should be a way to refer to a
>>version tree as a whole.  Some queries do not apply only to one member of a
>>version tree, but to the version tree as a whole.  Furthermore, some
>>operations may affect all members of the tree, rather than any specific
>>member.  In these cases, a way to refer to the whole version tree is
>>required.
>>
>>4.9.2.2. Referring to specific members of a version tree. There should be a
>>way to refer to each member of a version tree.  This means that each member
>>of the tree is itself a resource. This is required for version-specific
>>linking, and for non-versioning client support.
>>
>>And so on . . .
>>
>>OK?
>
>OK with me.
>
>- Jim
>
>
Received on Thursday, 20 February 1997 21:50:19 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:43:42 GMT