Teleconference minutes - October 11, 1999
Jim Whitehead (ejw@ics.uci.edu)
Mon, 11 Oct 1999 12:06:47 -0700
From: Jim Whitehead <ejw@ics.uci.edu>
To: ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org
Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 12:06:47 -0700
Message-ID: <NDBBIKLAGLCOPGKGADOJCEGGCGAA.ejw@ics.uci.edu>
Subject: Teleconference minutes - October 11, 1999
Delta-V Teleconference
October 11, 1999
Attending: Jeff McAffer, Geoff Clemm, Jim Amsden, Jim Whitehead, Tim Ellison
Some discussion of moving MKRESOURCE over to the Advanced Collections
Redirect Reference specification. Jeff & Geoff are in favor of this, while
Jim W. was concerned about inter-spec. dependencies after the advanced
collections specifications were completed.
Some discussion on mechanics of producing the new versioning specification.
Want to get in MKRESOURCE, REPORT, CHECKIN, CHECKOUT, and address Jim
Amsden's comments. Jeff McAffer will flesh out REPORT, for use as a
strawman, and basis for future discussion. Will include Judy's revised
MKRESOURCE specification. Should get Geoff Clemm information for the spec.
by Wednesday, end-of-day so it can be included in the spec.
Discussion of whether labels and revision identifiers are the same
namespace, or are different namespaces. Strong opinions on both sides of
this issue. One side holds that there is the possibility of a collision
between server-specified revision ids and client specified labels, and so
placing them in different namespaces eliminates this collision possibility.
The other side agrees with this, but notes that it is still possible for two
clients to have collisions in the label namespace, and this class of
collisions more likely than revision/label collisions. Furthermore, putting
both labels and revision ids in the same namespace will result in lower
marshalling complexity in the protocol, since one header can be used for
both. However, it was noted that even if labels and revision ids are in
separate namespaces, you could still marshall them in the same header. No
resolution on this issue -- take it to the list, and resolve in Washington.
Discussion on how to specify a specific revision given one of its revision
names (id or label). If we have a workspace, how (or can we) override it
with a specific revision name (place it in a separate header, or add syntax
to the workspace header for label ovrerride).
Discussion on whether we will have a separate breakout, beyond the official
WG meeting, for people who are going to be in Washington. Agreement that
there is. Jeff McAffer will call to arrange a separate meeting room in the
hotel across the street from the IETF meeting. This will be an open meeting,
for all who wish to attend, but it will be a working meeting, with the
expectation that those who attend will have read the drafts.
*** End of call ***