RE: Removing a resource: A compromise that satisfies?

• From: Clemm, Geoff <gclemm@rational.com>
• Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2001 23:04:02 -0400
• To: ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org
• Message-ID: <3906C56A7BD1F54593344C05BD1374B10350A35D@SUS-MA1IT01>

How about an alternative approach:

Add a new postcondition to DELETE that says:

"If a server does not support the version-history feature,
then it MAY automatically delete a version resource if that
version no longer appears in the DAV:version-tree report
of any version-controlled resource."

I believe this allows John and Lisa to do what they want,
without violating the concern of several of us that
a client should be able to count on a version being
preserved by a server while it is still being referenced
by another resource visible on the server.

I believe this approach is better than adding a body
to DELETE, because it does not require adding additional
protocol elements.

Cheers,
Geoff

Received on Wednesday, 13 June 2001 22:58:57 UTC