"Geoffrey M. Clemm" wrote: > And based on a few minutes of thought (and therefore at risk of being > significantly wrong :-), I believe that the new "bind" style advanced > collections being proposed would be very compatible with a server that > wanted to present several "ordered collections" containing the same > resources, but sorted by different orderings. Mmm, that sounds like it'd be good for read-only, but you could run into trouble if you wanted to add a resource to one of the orderings. -- /=============================================================\ |John Stracke | My opinions are my own | S/MIME & HTML OK | |francis@ecal.com|============================================| |Chief Scientist | NT's lack of reliability is only surpassed | |eCal Corp. | by its lack of scalability. -- John Kirch | \=============================================================/Received on Monday, 12 April 1999 13:24:58 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:43:49 GMT