Re: Revision names
jamsden@us.ibm.com
Wed, 13 Oct 1999 11:02:20 -0400
From: jamsden@us.ibm.com
To: ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org
Message-ID: <85256809.0052B54B.00@d54mta03.raleigh.ibm.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 11:02:20 -0400
Subject: RE: Revision names
the behavior of GET by including a header that indicates
which version I want. This has a lot of advantages in
that I can separate URL from version (revision). Also,
I can have separate headers, or special syntax in the
header to address #1.
<jra>
Agreed, but you don't need the special syntax if id's and labels aren't in
different namespaces.
</jra>
<ck2/> Only if there is a clear distinction -- for example a separate
header. I can say they are different namespaces, but given 'X',
how do I know which it is?
<jra>
There are many ways a server can determine if a revision name is a label or id.
1) check for id first, if it matches, is couldn't be a label and you're done.
Otherwise see if its a label. 2) put the id and labels in the same dictionary
and look them up together. In any case, it should be the server's responsibility
to figure this out, not the user's. The form of the id could be dictated by the
need to be a valid URL segment, but it at least must be able to be marshalled in
a header and/or entity body in XML. This is an orthogonal issue.
</jra>