W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-dist-auth@w3.org > April to June 1998

Re: File attributes (RE: The 7 Deadly Sins of Versioning)

From: Marcus Jager <mjager@microsoft.com>
Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 16:17:11 -0700
Message-ID: <174A69422993D111A13C00805FFE51B4053C72@sjc-msg-01.dns.microsoft.com>
To: WEBDAV WG <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>
The WebDAV requirements punted on alternates (variants). It just said that
they are needed and gave some vague ideas about what was needed. However the
versioning requirements asks for the server to have very strong notions
about the versions and their relationships.

I am asking if we can find a way of merging the variants with versioning so
that we get a solution to both.

Marcus.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: James Blaisdell [mailto:webdav@rapidlogic.com]
> Sent: Thursday, May 28, 1998 12:16 PM
> To: WEBDAV WG
> Subject: [Spam?] File attributes (was :File attributes (RE: The 7 Deadly
> Sins of Versioning))
> 
> 
> What you're asking would require a way to attach file
> attributes/properties
> to a document.  One of the best things about WebDAV is that it make very
> few assumptions about the server's underlying OS.  Inorder to keep track
> of
> different properties for a document you would need something akin to a
> resource fork.
> 
> There are some simple work-a-rounds:
> Different directories could store different language versions of a
> document.
> The html documents could contain a META tag that specifies the language.
> 
> What you are proposing is a much more elegant solution, however where
> would
> one stop?  Certainly content language is not the only http header one may
> wish to attach to a document, the protocol would have to have a way to
> specify all of the header information for a specific document.  Opening a
> whole new can a worms, and actually changing the way an HTTP server
> operates.
> 
> j.
> 
> At 11:30 AM 5/28/98 -0700, Marcus Jager wrote:
> >Hi,
> >
> >Excuse me for de-lurking and asking a silly question.
> >
> >Is it necessary to handle versioning differently from language
> alternates?
> >
> >To put it another way, can we unify the problem to how we handle
> alternate
> >resources for particular resource. Thus leaving the problem of
> >interpretation of what the alternates mean and operating on them to the
> >clients outside of WebDAV.
> >
> >So far WebDAV has avoided forcing any structure or format on the contents
> of
> >the resources that it accesses and stores. I think it would be dangerous
> to
> >give this up.
> >
> >Marcus.
> >
Received on Thursday, 28 May 1998 19:15:07 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:43:47 GMT