Message-ID: <FD7A762E588AD211A7BC00805FFEA54B041DD94A@HYDRANT> From: "Chris Kaler (Exchange)" <ckaler@Exchange.Microsoft.com> To: "'Tim_Ellison@oti.com'" <Tim_Ellison@oti.com>, ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org Date: Thu, 7 Oct 1999 09:55:37 -0700 Subject: RE: target selector again & again The idea was this, you get the history resource's href and the revision id. Assuming that the server supports property collections, then the history resource will have a sub-resource named the same as the revision id. However, I still believe that the server should be allowed to support whatever naming strategy it wants and that property resources are optional. :-) Chris -----Original Message----- From: Tim_Ellison@oti.com [mailto:Tim_Ellison@oti.com] Sent: Thursday, October 07, 1999 6:47 AM To: ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org Subject: RE: target selector again & again <chris> Sorry, but "ick" :-)... </chris> <tpe> I'm so glad you said that! </tpe> <geoff> The current protocol (02.2) specifies that a revision resource has a DAV:history property (a property resource) containing the history resource for that revision, and a history resource has a DAV:revisions property (a property collection) that contains all revisions of that versioned resource (named by their revision-id's). </geoff> <tpe> Strange that the DAV:history would contain a resource, not a reference to a resource. See further comments below. </tpe> <geoff> In particular, if we define the "XML" form of DAV:history property resource suitably, a client will be able to obtain the revision URL in a single PROPFIND request on the versioned resource. </geoff> <tpe> i.e. PROPFIND myresource <propfind> <prop> <dav:history/> <dav:revision-id/> </prop> </propfind> </tpe> <geoff> In particular, the DAV:revision-id will contain the revision id (reasonably enough :-), and the XML form of the DAV:history property would contain the DAV:revisions property (whose value is the name of the revisions collection). The client can then just concatenate the DAV:revisions value with a slash and the DAV:revision-id to get the revision URL. </geoff> <tpe> Now this is where it gets surreal :-) The history property contains an XML representation of a history resource that has a revisions property. This makes the revisions property a pseudo-prop (since it cannot be singularly retrieved by a PROPFIND; it is embeddd in a dav property). A client always has to retrieve the entire history resource even if it only wants a single part of it. Is this right? </tpe>