- From: <Tim_Ellison@uk.ibm.com>
- Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2000 09:34:14 +0000
- To: ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org
> From: Tim_Ellison@uk.ibm.com > The spec should say that workspaces cannot 'overlap', > i.e., a workspace cannot be a member of another workspace, > and bindings cannot be made outside the workspace. > Having multiple workpace 'parents' would confuse > many things, including current activity, and make > workspace semantics for single history selectors very > time consuming to enforce. > > This is a good point, but I think we can address it in a > less draconian fashion. 8-| > I think it is sufficient to state that a version selector > is contained by at most one workspace, namely, the one > specified in its DAV:workspace property, and that when a > resource is put under version control, its DAV:workspace > property is set to be the DAV:workspace of its parent > collection. Ok. > This does raise another question: > > Should we require a DAV:workspace property on *non-version- > controlled* workspace members? Yes. > If not, we need to modify the preceding statement to say: > > "... the DAV:workspace of its nearest parent collection > that has a DAV:workspace property."
Received on Monday, 20 November 2000 04:40:31 UTC