Next message: jamsden@us.ibm.com: "Re: Removing the "single line of descent" restriction on activities"
Message-ID: <006301bf57b9$e0afb100$79442382@us.oracle.com>
From: "Eric Sedlar" <esedlar@us.oracle.com>
To: "Geoffrey M. Clemm" <geoffrey.clemm@rational.com>, <ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2000 12:17:23 -0800
Subject: Re: nested DAV:rsr-or and DAV:rsr-merge
Anything that simplifies RSR's is a good idea, in my opinion.
--Eric
----- Original Message -----
From: Geoffrey M. Clemm <geoffrey.clemm@rational.com>
To: <ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org>
Sent: Wednesday, January 05, 2000 10:42 AM
Subject: nested DAV:rsr-or and DAV:rsr-merge
>
> In a fit of excess generality, I originally proposed that the these
> RSR elements be allowed to nest. Since nested DAV:rsr-or's are
> identical to a flattened single DAV:rsr-or (and similarly for
> DAV:rsr-merge), the only point for this is to allow intermingled
> DAV:rsr-or and DAV:rsr-merge. Since I expect few (if any) servers
> will implement intermingled DAV:rsr-or's and DAV:rsr-merge's in our
> lifetime, it seems more sensible to leave this as a possible future
> extension.
>
> So I propose that DAV:rsr-or and DAV:rsr-merge no longer be specified
> as nesting in the current protocol.
>
> Comments?
>
> Cheers,
> Geoff
>
>