Message-ID: <65B141FB11CCD211825700A0C9D609BC01D4D75B@chef.lex.rational.com> From: "Clemm, Geoff" <gclemm@Rational.Com> To: ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2000 17:57:53 -0500 Subject: RE: Defaults One approach to this problem is to replace the DAV:default-revision property with a SET-DEFAULT-REVISION method (yes Chris, the one you proposed a year ago ... :-). This would mean that all a core versioning server would be required to do is to implement this method. An advanced versioning server (which provides the notion of a default-workspace) would just have to ensure that this revision is selected by the default workspace (moving a default label, whatever). Cheers, Geoff -----Original Message----- From: Tim Ellison/OTT/OTI [mailto:Tim_Ellison@oti.com] Sent: Thursday, March 09, 2000 12:08 PM To: ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org Subject: Defaults When is request is received that does not specify the Workspace: and/or Revision-Selector:, the revision selection seems quite complicated. Here's my interpretation (refs from 03.1 protocol doc): (1) (a) For each versioned collection being resolved, first use the collection's default workspace to pick a revision/working collection (ref. 10.1.1). (b) If there is no default workspace specified for the collection, choose the default revision (ref. 8.1). (c) If there is no default revision specified use the 'server determined default workspace' (ref. 9.1). (d) If there is still no revision selected then the reference is not found. (2) For the final resource being resolved, first consider the Revision-Selector in preference to anything else (ref. 7.2 & 3.3.3). If there is no Revision-Selector then use the resolution strategy of step (1) Section 3.3.3 says that the default-revision shoul donly be used if "no Workspace: or Revision-Selector: header is specified" -- I don't see how that fits in :-( Sounds a bit complicated doesn't it? Why do we want default workspaces for each collection, and default revisions for each resource? Comments. Tim