Next message: Vasta, John: "RE: "2xx: Partial Merge" ?"
Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2000 20:06:23 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <200009080006.UAA28438@tantalum.atria.com>
From: "Geoffrey M. Clemm" <geoffrey.clemm@rational.com>
To: ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org
Subject: Re: 07 Review
From: "Jim Amsden/Raleigh/IBM" <jamsden@us.ibm.com>
<gmc/>
Currently, the result of a successful VERSION-CONTROL request is
that there is a version selector resource at the request URL. I
think that having a single request to achieve this post-condition
is appropriate.
<jra>
VERSION-CONTROL is a verb indicating a resource is being put under version
control. The fact that it changes a URL to refer to a revision instead of
an unversioned resource seems quite different than creating a new version
selector URL to an existing revision. Didn't we have a MKRESOURCE method
once that took a request body that contained the same contents as
PROPPATCH. This seems like the right solution here.
</jra>
For me, the key semantics for a method are the postconditions that are
true after the method is successfully executed. The fact that the
process of getting there depends on the initial state of the resource
identified by the request-URL and the arguments to the method seems
quite reasonable.
Using the same criteria, MKRESOURCE is a poor method, since the
postconditions of MKRESOURCE varies widely, depending on what type of
resource is being created (which is why we switched to having
MKACTIVITY and MKWORKSPACE instead of MKRESOURCE).
Cheers,
Geoff