Next message: Ross Wetmore: "Re: BATCH operation [was Re: Comments on draft-ietf-deltav-versioning-08]"
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 09:01:35 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <200009281301.JAA28771@tantalum.atria.com>
From: "Geoffrey M. Clemm" <geoffrey.clemm@rational.com>
To: ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org
Subject: Re: BATCH operation [was Re: Comments on draft-ietf-deltav-versioning-08]
From: Ross Wetmore <rwetmore@verticalsky.com>
... a nested operation was assumed to take place just before the
previous operation completed and add an extra condition to whether
or not the operation was successful. If there was a failure the
rollbacks would take place up the stack as currently defined, and
as one is still in the context of the executing operation the code
should already be in place to do this. I admit, this glosses over a
lot of the "details" though.
This is perhaps the most minimalist implementation I could come up
with on the spur of the moment that might have the desired
effect. I am sure there are better if there is some sort of
concensus that this needs to be considered further. I am curious if
there are any other opinions on some aspect of this? I hope we
have at least got the basic elements vs side issues flushed out by
the last couple exchanges!
I agree that a "BATCH" method is worth pursuing.
I believe, though, that this should be pursued in a general WebDAV
context, since this is not a versioning-specific method, and should
be designed to be appropriate for non-versioning contexts.
In addition, I believe it is not clear that this optimization
(although a useful one) is required to implement effective versioning
clients and servers.
My preference then is to evaluate/develop a BATCH method in a general
WebDAV context (i.e. in the WebDAV rather than the DeltaV working
group), and to do this in parallel with (rather than as a
pre-requisite for) reaching draft standard status for the versioning
protocol extensions.
Cheers,
Geoff