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

RE: Reminder: WG Last Call on Ordered Collections

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2003 19:27:12 +0200
To: "B. Shadgar" <shadgar@cs.bris.ac.uk>, "Julian Reschke" <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Cc: "w3c-dist-auth" <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>
Message-ID: <JIEGINCHMLABHJBIGKBCOEBHHCAA.julian.reschke@gmx.de>

> From: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org
> [mailto:w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of B. Shadgar
> Sent: Thursday, April 24, 2003 12:00 PM
> To: Julian Reschke
> Cc: B. Shadgar; w3c-dist-auth
> Subject: Re: Reminder: WG Last Call on Ordered Collections
>
>
>
> Julian Reschke wrote:
>
> > > From: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org
> > > [mailto:w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of B. Shadgar
> > > Sent: Wednesday, April 23, 2003 7:55 PM
> > > To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
> > > Cc: w3c-dist-auth
> > > Subject: Re: Reminder: WG Last Call on Ordered Collections
> > > ..
> > >
> > > Well, I was thinking that maybe the best use case of the Ordering
> > > protocol was
> > > regarded to the versioning of resources. In this case, I though
> > > if every time
> > > that a revision is created, a live property containing the name
> > > of resource was
> > >
> > > attached to the resource, maybe we didn't need to the new Ordered
> > > protocol.
> > >
> > > Does it make sense?
> >
> > Now you got me confused :-) What's the relation of (1) resource
> names and
> > (2) versioning to ordering collection members?
> >
> > Julian
>
> Dear Julian
>
> Sorry.  I may be wrong, it is just some thought.
> 1) the resource names to ordering collection:
>
> By my undrestanding, what is suggested in the ordering
> collection, is a way
> to change the order of resources and put them the at the
> beginning or end of
> the list, after or before a given resource. Also this is true that in the
> Real numbers you can always find a number less or a number greater than a
> given number.
> Consider, you have a live property called resource-name which is
> made by the
> name of resource followed by a Real number. Now every time you
> would like to
> have a new order, system can change the resource- name based on your order
> (by changing the Real part of resource-names) . Then by using the order
> option on the resource-name in the Search protocol we can have the desired
> order.

I understand that you're saying that using a combination of dead properties
and DASL queries, similar results could be obtained. This is true. However,
modelling collection ordering as property of the containing collection has
the following advantages:

- no need to modify resources
- no need to come up with unique property names per containing collection
- no dependendy on an unfinished spec
- existing clients can take immediate advantage by just not sorting a
PROPFIND result
- ...

> ...

Hope this helps in understanding the motivation,

Julian

--
<green/>bytes GmbH -- http://www.greenbytes.de -- tel:+492512807760
Received on Thursday, 24 April 2003 13:27:21 GMT

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