Next message: Boris Bokowski/OTT/OTI: "Re: Naive question"
From: Tim_Ellison@uk.ibm.com
To: ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org
Message-ID: <8025695A.004377F3.00@d06mta07.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 13:16:41 +0100
Subject: Re: Working resource locations
<tim>
I'm puzzled by the language used in the 10.2 CHECKOUT postconditions, which
states that "...the server MAY locate the working resource at the
request-URL, effectively replacing the version selector...".
</tim>
<geoff/>That language is there to make sure that clients are prepared to
deal with workspace behavior.
<tim_2>
I'm sure that there will be clients that are happy with core and don't
appreciate being prepared for an advanced feature that they have no
intention of using.
It seems to me that whether the server overwrites the target selector or
not is a fundamental issue for the client, and they are unlikely to be able
to cope with 'MAY'.
Consider that if the server does overwite the version selector, the
original request URL now exposes the working resource, and thereby the work
in progress -- other clients will see the updates taking place on the live
server. However, if the server doesn't overwite the target selector the
updates are done 'on the side' and released/published/... to the server
upon checkin. IMHO clients will program to one of these paradigms and fall
into one camp or the other.
Tim