Re: Re (2): Removing the DAV:activity and DAV:version-history and DAV:baseline resource type values

On Tue, Jun 05, 2001 at 05:29:08PM -0400, Edgar@edgarschwarz.de wrote:
>...
> Then you always will have discussions about whether new resource types will
> be necessary if they just have one or two more methods or properties than
> another one.

The resources in the spec are not defined by the set of methods or
properties. They are defined by *human* concepts. We have identified a model
which incorporates Version Controlled Resources, Baselines, Activities,
Workspaces, Working Resources, Version Resource, etc.

Note that I used labels to define those things. I did *not* use
{DAV:checked-in}, {DAV:baseline-collection}, {DAV:activity-version-set},
{DAV:workspace-checkout-set}, {???}, {DAV:checkout-set} as the descriptions.

Some further points:

*) howthehell do I describe a Working Resource? I can't see that it has a
   unique property.

*) is DAV:checkout-set actually unique to a Version resource? Some of those
   properties are reflected in VCRs. Which Version Resource properties *do*
   get copied to a VCR, and which do not? The ones that don't will therefore
   signal whether a resource is a Version resource or not.

Sorry. But the human is what we are writing this spec for. And we attach
labels to these things. Not a set.

Oh: and Tim argued, "well, for somebody to implement DeltaV, we're going to
ask a lot more than simple Set computations." Oh. Great. Just because some
part is difficult, that means we can make *everything* difficult? That's
bogus.

"Hey, John. You can do DeltaV if you can jump over this 6 foot bar. Oh.
Wait. The DeltaV designers said that if you can do that, then you can also
jump over this 10 foot bar. Cool. Go, man! Jump!"

pthtpth. Non-starter.

Cheers,
-g

-- 
Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/

Received on Wednesday, 6 June 2001 02:21:15 UTC