FW: A question on Versioning-unaware cl

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
• Next message: Chris Kaler: "Re: target selector again & again"
• Previous message: Tim Ellison OTT: "Re: GETting a versioned resource"

From: Tim_Ellison@oti.com (Tim Ellison OTT)
To: ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org (ietf-dav-versioning)
Message-ID: <1999Oct07.095700.1250.1344863@otismtp.ott.oti.com>
Date: Thu, 07 Oct 1999 09:59:44 -0400
Subject: FW: A question on Versioning-unaware cl


<chris>
     It seems to me, that if a server supports multiple
     protocols, then a "PUT" via a non-versioning-aware
     client/protocol, should be treated "always" as
     automatic versioning.
</chris>

At least for my benefit, could you clarify/restate the problem.

We're defining a protocol extension to HTTP for versioning.  If a server 
supports multiple protocols (ftp, gopher, etc) then clearly there will be 
issues for such servers to maintain data integrity across protocols, but why 
would it affect DAV?

I appreciate it is different for 'down-level' clients (i.e. HTTP without DAV 
extensions).

Tim

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
• Next message: Chris Kaler: "Re: target selector again & again"
• Previous message: Tim Ellison OTT: "Re: GETting a versioned resource"