Next message: Geoffrey M. Clemm: "Re: Missing advanced preconditions from PUT, MKCOL, COPY?"
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 12:46:55 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <200009181646.MAA14356@tantalum.atria.com>
From: "Geoffrey M. Clemm" <geoffrey.clemm@rational.com>
To: ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org
Subject: Re: Naive question
From: Tim_Ellison@uk.ibm.com
If I think of the version selector as a copy of the version (content and
dead properties) it selects then maybe it makes a bit more sense. The live
properties were not copied so you don't see them in the version selector,
and there is no call for a 'metadata' type header.
Maybe if 'version selector' and 'working resource' were described as
"states" of existing resources rather than resources themselves.
This sounds to me to be a good way of clearing up the confusion.
In particular, when you do a CHECKOUT, it either converts the version
selector to a "checked-out" state (if the CHECKOUT is "DAV:here"),
or it creates a new "working resource" (if the CHECKOUT is "DAV:not-here").
Then you can either CHECKIN a checked-out version selector (which creates
a new version and returns the version selector to "checked in" state,
or you can CHECKIN a working resource (which creates a new version and
deletes the working resource).
This also clears up the confusion in another thread about the two kinds
of CHECKOUT behavior (i.e. the one that "replaces" the version selector,
and the one that allocates a new URL).
Let's try to discuss this at the con-call today.
Cheers,
Geoff