Next message: Sankar Virdhagriswaran: "announcement -- release of software"
Message-ID: <65B141FB11CCD211825700A0C9D609BC01D4D7B5@chef.lex.rational.com>
From: "Clemm, Geoff" <gclemm@Rational.Com>
To: ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2000 17:57:19 -0500
Subject: RE: renaming "Workspace" header to be the "Target-Selector" heade r
I think Jim makes a good point here, and since nobody else voted,
I'll go with Jim's preference and keep them the way they are.
Cheers,
Geoff
-----Original Message-----
From: jamsden@us.ibm.com [mailto:jamsden@us.ibm.com]
Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2000 2:16 PM
To: ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org
Subject: Re: renaming "Workspace" header to be the "Target-Selector"
header
I like the workspace header whose value is a workspace resource. I never
liked target... because it seemed to confuse the roles of revision
selection and revision selection override. Workspaces select the revision
while the revision-selector provides the override in those cases where it
is necessary. So I guess I vote to leave them as is.
|------------------------+------------------------>
| | "Clemm, Geoff" |
| | <gclemm@rational.com>|
| | Sent by: |
| | ietf-dav-versioning-r|
| | equest@w3.org |
| | |
| | 03/21/2000 01:32 PM |
| | |
|------------------------+------------------------>
>------------------------|
| |
| To: |
| "DeltaV (E-mail)" |
| <ietf-dav-versioning@|
| w3.org> |
| cc: |
| Subject: |
| renaming "Workspace" |
| header to be the |
| "Target-Selector" |
| header |
>------------------------|
In my recent pass through the protocol, I've been finding it somewhat
confusing to have both a workspace resource and a Workspace header. I'd
like to try switching back to an earlier name, i.e. "Target-Selector" for
this header to see if this makes things less confusing. I'd also like to
change "Revision-Selector" to be "Request-Target-Selector" to emphasize
its relationship to the "Target-Selector" header, and to emphasize that it
only applies to target selection for the request URL.
Another (very minor) advantage to this switch is that it would make it
natural to put a workspace in both headers, so that you can copy from one
working
resource to another. For example, I could say:
COPY /foo
Request-Target-Selector: /workspaces/my_ws
Destination: /foo
Target-Selector: /workspaces/other_ws
Any objections?
Cheers,
Geoff