Re: Version issues
Geoffrey M. Clemm (gclemm@tantalum.atria.com)
Fri, 2 Apr 1999 12:51:11 -0500
Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1999 12:51:11 -0500
Message-Id: <9904021751.AA26351@tantalum>
From: "Geoffrey M. Clemm" <gclemm@tantalum.atria.com>
To: sv@crystaliz.com
Cc: ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org
In-Reply-To: <012b01be7cb0$75514020$e6ea7392@honeybee> (sv@crystaliz.com)
Subject: Re: Version issues
From: "Sankar Virdhagriswaran" <sv@crystaliz.com>
At one point during this thread Chris for the record stated his desire to
manage the 'workspace' like information on the client to support
scalability.
I think this is an interesting question and requires further thought. My
initial reaction was that the key trade-off here is between scalability (of
the ilk that Chris is concerned about) and consistency. I would love to hear
what others think about this issue.
I believe that we are committed to a protocol that is compatible
with both "workspace on the client" and "workspace on the server"
(and it ain't easy to do so! :-). This was at the heart of the
"what is a workspace" thread. I believe that the protocol now does
work effectively in both of those scenarios, where a workspace with
a read-only empty RSR provides the "lightweight" workspace needed for
the "workspace on the client" scenario.
Cheers,
Geoff