W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-dist-auth@w3.org > January to March 1999

RE: [long] Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-webdav-versioning-01.txt

From: Larry Masinter <masinter@parc.xerox.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1999 13:51:16 PST
To: "John Stracke" <francis@ecal.com>, <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>
Message-ID: <000b01be6c09$4a3d7640$79d3000d@copper.parc.xerox.com>


> > > If we defined a collection that contains all revisions of a versioned
> > > resource, where a member of that collection is named by its
> > > revision-id, then it would be within these guidelines (i.e. it would
> > > not be URL-munging) for a client to take the collection URL, extend it
> > > with a revision-id, and use the resulting URL to locate the desired
> > > revision.
> >
> > No, I think that doing so would be an extension of the currently
> > known required URL-munging methods.
> 
> I'm not sure I understand why this would be so.  It seems to me that all
> you've got here is a collection that is defined to contain references to
> revisions; the munging going on is the same munging that happens when you
> ask for a member of a collection.  No?

In DAV, the members of a collection are designated with complete
URLs. If the "revision-ID" is used to construct a relative URL which
is combined with the "version collection" to create the URL of a particular
version, then you wouldn't be doing any new URL munging, since you'd
be doing relative URL calculation. However, you'd want to make sure
that the relative URLs constructed didn't contain "/" or "." or reserved
characters.

Larry
-- 
http://www.parc.xerox.com/masinter
Received on Thursday, 11 March 1999 16:51:36 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:43:49 GMT