Re: Target-Selector value
Tim Ellison OTT (Tim_Ellison@oti.com)
Tue, 05 Oct 1999 11:45:04 -0400
From: Tim_Ellison@oti.com (Tim Ellison OTT)
To: jamsden@us.ibm.com (jamsden)
Cc: ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org (ietf-dav-versioning)
Message-ID: <1999Oct05.114100.1250.1342120@otismtp.ott.oti.com>
Date: Tue, 05 Oct 1999 11:45:04 -0400
Subject: Re: Target-Selector value
<jra>
The revision id and label namespaces don't overlap, so
there's no need to distinguish them.
</jra>
<tpe>
I can easily imagine revision selectors being Integers -- these would
collide with labels that are equivalent String form of Integers;
i.e.
revisionid: 3
label: 3
</tpe>
<jra>
The ambiguity [...snip...] could also result if we allow the Target-Selector
to be any revision selector (my preferred name) including activity,
configuration, etc. [...snip...]
</jra>
<tpe>
I have no problem with the Target-Selector URI representing any type
(config, activity,...) since, if I know it is a resource, I (the server) can
determine it's type easily.
</tpe>
<jra>
It seems a little funny to use the protocol part of a URL as
a namespace qualifier though.
</jra>
<tpe>
See 'opaquelocktoken:' and http://www.w3.org/Addressing/schemes.html for
many examples.
</tpe>