From: jamsden@us.ibm.com To: ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org Message-ID: <8525691A.000AF8D2.00@d54mta02.raleigh.ibm.com> Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 21:59:45 -0400 Subject: Review of core versioning spec 05 Abstract: should this mention configurations or baselines. This is an important concept to include. mutable revisions are not in core versioning? default target is defined, but not target. 2.2: a versioned resource does not display content & properties of a revision. It also doesn't seem like the point of SET-TARGET is to modify the state of the verisoned resource. Perhaps this section should read: "The SET-TARGET method may be used to set the revision to be used as the default-target of a versioned resource. The default-target revision is that revision that will be selected when the request URL refers to the versioned resource, and no Target-Selector header is present." 2.3 last sentence of 1st paragraph: ... can be given to two revisions from...: remove two, it can be given to any number of revisions. 3.2.1 creator-displayname has limited value: can be changed anytime by anyone, syntax isn't specified, doesn't correspond to a principal. Why not use the principal? Don't we think authentication should be required to check something in? 3.3.1 The default revision could be indicated by: - an isDefault boolean property on a revision - a "default" label functor on a revision - a label on the versioned resource (let the server figure out what revision has the label) This would eliminate one use of server generated URLs. 3.5.1 DAV:checked-out needs to be DAV:predecessor-set for working resources to be consistent with support for advanced versioning merging. Why not use the same property for the same function in working resources and revisions? 5. a versioned resource isn't checked out, the target revision is. 5.2.1 Add versioning methods to OPTIONS Allow: response. 5.6 Do we need to define meta-data on properties that allows them to be protected and able to be changed without creating a new revision? Users might want to be able to define their own properties with this kind of behavior. 5.10 Then what are the semantics of LOCK on a revision, versioned resource, etc.? 6.1 Do we want to return a 20x status code if VERSION is applied to an already versioned resource just to indicate to the client that this was the case? 6.2 A CHECKOUT request is applied to a revision, not a versioned resource. If the request URL is the versioned resource, then the target revision is selected (either the default-target, or the target selected by the Target-Selector header). Why is there a checkout element in the entity request body to specify something that can be easily specified in the request URI or the target-selector? What if the CHECKOUT request URI is a revision URL and the checkout revision in the entity request body is a different revision? This seems redundant. DAV:checked-out should be DAV:predecessor-set. 6.3 405 The request-URL did not identify a working resource What does it mean to checkin with a Target-Selector header? Does the Target-Selector header have to be the working resource URL? 6.5 Seems like the Target-Selector header should be able to be used to specify the target in SET-TARGET instead of an entity request body. This would help unify target selection. 6.6 Are labels already available in an existing report? Having LABEL do editing and reporting complicates the method with unrelated functionality, and confuses the entity response. 7.1 How can the DAV:successor-report be applied to a versioned resource? Versioned resources don't have successors and predecessors. The report returns server generated revision URLs. These will likely not be very meaningful to the client who would prefer the versioned resource URL and a label. How will a client be able to display this more meaningful information in a printed report? 7.2 Again, how can the DAV:checkout-report be applied to a versioned resource? Do you mean using a versioned resource URL and Target-Selector and the method applies to the default-target if the Target-Selector isn't specified? 7.3 do we want to introduce a "latest" functor for the Target-Selector instead of using a DAV:latest-checkin-report? Then users can operate on the latest revision in a single method. 7.4 How would the client be able to predict what information will come back from the DAV:revision-tree-report if the server can arbitrarily decide which elements to eliminate?