Re: Question:is vresourceid copied?
Geoffrey M. Clemm (gclemm@tantalum.atria.com)
Wed, 19 May 1999 05:12:19 -0400
Date: Wed, 19 May 1999 05:12:19 -0400
Message-Id: <9905190912.AA04485@tantalum>
From: "Geoffrey M. Clemm" <gclemm@tantalum.atria.com>
To: gclemm@tantalum.atria.com
Cc: ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org
In-Reply-To: <9905190826.AA04387@tantalum> (gclemm@tantalum.atria.com)
Subject: Re: Question:is vresourceid copied?
Sorry to follow up on myself, but my terse responses might have
given the wrong impression. Jim correctly points out undefined or
missing semantics in the 01 spec. I was just giving the answers
that I believe the new spec should give to these questions.
Cheers,
Geoff
Date: Wed, 19 May 1999 04:26:01 -0400
From: "Geoffrey M. Clemm" <gclemm@tantalum.atria.com>
Resent-From: ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org> archive/latest/189
X-Loop: ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org
Sender: ietf-dav-versioning-request@w3.org
Resent-Sender: ietf-dav-versioning-request@w3.org
Precedence: list
Content-Type: text
Content-Length: 305
From: "Jim Davis" <jdavis@coursenet.com>
The draft (2.9) says that DAV:vresourceid must be preserved by a MOVE.
What about a COPY?
A COPY creates a new resource, so the DAV:vresourceid would not be
preserved.
Could you have two distinct resources with the same value?
No.
Cheers
Geoff