- From: Geoffrey M. Clemm <geoffrey.clemm@rational.com>
- Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 17:58:16 -0500 (EST)
- To: ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org
From: Tim_Ellison@uk.ibm.com Separating the workspace 'ownership' from the workspace 'membership' would resolve this issue. It certainly has the potential to mess up some workspace optimizations. Would you allow version selectors to change workspace ownership? Not in my server (:-). > From: Tim_Ellison@uk.ibm.com > > So when I have two workspaces A and B both with bindings > to a resource C, in which workspace is C? > > I'd just leave that up to the server. I'd suggest the following > constraint: "the DAV:workspace of a resource MUST be the same as > the DAV:workspace of one of its parents, unless the resource > itself is a workspace, in which case the DAV:workspace MUST > identify the resource itself." Conceptually, why would you add this constraint if ownership and membership are orthogonal concepts? So a reserved 'yes', provided the constraint was made (for efficient implementation reasons), and clients cannot change a resource's workspace ownership. Yes, I would have this constraint (to allow efficient distributed workspace implementation), and would not provide a mechanism for the client to change a resource's workspace. Cheers, Geoff
Received on Tuesday, 21 November 2000 17:58:56 UTC