Re: Revision names

Tim Ellison OTT (Tim_Ellison@oti.com)
Wed, 13 Oct 1999 10:42:44 -0400 

From: Tim_Ellison@oti.com (Tim Ellison OTT)
To: ckaler@Exchange.Microsoft.com (Chris Kaler Exchange),
Message-ID: <1999Oct13.104000.1250.1350706@otismtp.ott.oti.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 10:42:44 -0400
Subject: RE: Revision names


<chris2/> URIs are supposed to be globally unique...

<tim/> URN's have to be globally unique, but URI's do not.



<chris/> 3) You limit the stores ability to create its own URLs
<tim/> servers would have to produce conforming URIs
<chris2/> Which means that they can use their own format...
<tim2/> Agreed, provided they conformed to the URI syntax.



  <chris/>
  I don't understand your point about REPORT.  You can report
  multiple revisions of the same resource regardless of how
  you represent the URL.

  <tim/>
  My point was that unless you had a URI to a specific revision,
  you could not issue a REPORT request that selected two
  revisions of the same resource since there is currently only
  a single Target-Selector.

<chris2/> I disagree.
            <conflictitem>
               <href>...</href>
               <ref>...</rev>
            </conflictitem>
          However, I do want to have revision-specific URLs, I just want
          the server to be able to give them ANY value



<tim2>
You can do this for REPORT since the href is in the body and we can define 
extra tags to modify the href interpretation.  However, COPY, for example, 
passes the destination URL in the header, so we would have to have a 
different approach there.
     COPY /~fielding/index.html HTTP/1.1
     Target-Selector: revisionid:21
     Workspace: http://www.ics.uci.edu/~fielding/workspace
     Host: www.ics.uci.edu
     Destination: http://www.ics.uci.edu/users/f/fielding/index.html
(which /users/f/fielding/ is the destination going into?)
<tim2/>



 <tim/>
  I agree that the client would not be able to parse the URL in general.
  How should clients get the revision-specific URL?
<chris2/> There is a property -- well there was a property -- it seems
          to be gone now???  There was a revisionurl property on revisions.
          Geoff -- when/why did we remove this?


Tim