- From: Geoffrey M. Clemm <geoffrey.clemm@rational.com>
- Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2000 12:19:32 -0500 (EST)
- To: ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org
I think Tim may be right (what you call something often does matter :-). So I'd like to open up the floor for a new name for DAV:target. We have Tim's suggestion: DAV:based-on Some other possibilities: DAV:state, DAV:current-state Any other suggestions? Cheers, Geoff From: Tim_Ellison@uk.ibm.com Geoff Clemm wrote: > Note that we need to be a bit careful with the terms > "refer" and "latest" in this context. When a version- > controlled resource is checked-in, its content and dead > properties are the same as those of the version resource > identified by the DAV:target of the version-controlled > resource, but the URL refers to the version-controlled > resource, not to that version resource, and the > DAV:target is not necessarily the "latest" version (new > versions can be created in the version history without > changing the DAV:target of the versin controlled resource). Geoff's comments are worth re-posting just to hammer the point home. A version-controlled resource (VCR) is NOT a reference/pointer/redirector to a version -- it is a resource with the same content and dead properties as a version (a 'copy' if you will). Operations on the VCR do not affect the version from which it was created. I'm struggling to determine the cause of the continued confusion. Maybe it is the historical name (version selector), or the fact that it has a DAV:target property, or the fact that the protocol has an easy way to step over the VCR to the vesion, or are people thinking of implementations? Would renaming 'DAV:target' to 'DAV:based-on' or such like help? Tim
Received on Thursday, 21 December 2000 12:20:19 UTC