W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-dist-auth@w3.org > April to June 2003

RE: Ordered collections and versioned collections

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Sun, 6 Apr 2003 09:30:16 +0200
To: "Lisa Dusseault" <lisa@xythos.com>, "Webdav WG" <w3c-dist-auth@w3c.org>
Message-ID: <JIEGINCHMLABHJBIGKBCAEHLGPAA.julian.reschke@gmx.de>

> From: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org
> [mailto:w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Lisa Dusseault
> Sent: Saturday, April 05, 2003 10:47 PM
> To: Webdav WG
> Subject: Ordered collections and versioned collections
>
>
>
>
> It seems from draft-ietf-webdav-ordering-protocol-07 that only
> version-controlled resources are part of the ordering of
> version-controlled collections (Section 9: "for compatibility with
> RFC3253, only the ordering of version-controlled members needs to be
> maintained")

The full context being:

"This specification considers both the ordering type (DAV:ordering-type
property) and the ordering of collection members to be part of the state of
a collection. Therefore both MUST be recorded upon CHECKIN or
VERSION-CONTROL, and both MUST be restored upon CHECKOUT, UNCHECKOUT or
UPDATE (where for compatibility with RFC3253, only the ordering of
version-controlled members needs to be maintained)."

> Does that mean there's no way to order versioned and unversioned
> resources together within a version-controlled collection?

Nope. It's supposed to mean that you *can* order both types of resources
within a versioned-controlled collection, but collection *versions* will
only keep ordering information for those members that were
version-controlled.

Do I need to rephrase the text to make this clearer?

Julian

--
<green/>bytes GmbH -- http://www.greenbytes.de -- tel:+492512807760
Received on Sunday, 6 April 2003 03:30:26 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:44:04 GMT