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

RE: New Requirements Draft

From: Yaron Goland <yarong@microsoft.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Aug 1997 13:40:58 -0700
Message-ID: <11352BDEEB92CF119F3F00805F14F485037BC200@RED-44-MSG.dns.microsoft.com>
To: "'Andre van der Hoek'" <andre@bigtime.cs.colorado.edu>
Cc: mduerst@ifi.unizh.ch, slein@wrc.xerox.com, w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
I don't see how we avoid that particular solution if we are going to use
the HTTP protocol. With versioning we had a clean slate, the http
protocol has nothing to say on the topic. The only mention was the
content-version header and that has been removed from the spec. The same
can not be said for variants where HTTP has some very specific things to
say on the subject. We are very constrained in this area and we must
address how those constraints effect DAV.

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Andre van der Hoek [SMTP:andre@bigtime.cs.colorado.edu]
> Sent:	Wednesday, August 27, 1997 1:28 PM
> To:	Yaron Goland
> Cc:	mduerst@ifi.unizh.ch; slein@wrc.xerox.com; w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
> Subject:	Re: New Requirements Draft 
> > We can't have a conversation where everyone is using the same word
> to
> > mean different things. I have defined what the term variant means in
> > HTTP. If you use the word variant, in a HTTP working group, it is
> > expected that you will use it to mean what it means in HTTP. If you
> are
> > referring to a concept other than the one meant by HTTP, please use
> > another term.
> Wrong use of the word "definition" here. You have not defined
> variants, you have given a restrictive solution to the variant problem
> and proclaimed that that is the definition. That is wrong. For
> example, versioning is not defined the same way in WebDAV either. You
> don't say "check-out" and "check-in" define versioning, but instead
> you list a versioning requirement and say that a limited solution to
> this is provided by the WebDAV standard through the solution
> "check-out" and "check-in". Similarly, we are asking for the WebDAV
> group to do the same thing for variants.
> We are both talking about exactly the same concepts here:
>    A variant is a structurally different, but functionally equivalent 
>    document.
> I can't find the original Tichy definition here, but the spirit is the
> above.
> However, you have given a solution, that many of us don't feel
> appropriate. What we are asking for is for WebDAV to come up with a
> broader solution, that does not limit itself.
> === Andre ===
Received on Wednesday, 27 August 1997 16:41:02 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:01:16 UTC