Actually, you don't need COPY or MOVE, what you really seem to want is CLONE.

I still can't see where it is useful to know about two different version
histories, one that you have poor information on (the source of the
COPY) and an old version history that is no longer relevent to the
actual content (since you overlayed it).



> -----Original Message-----
> From: ietf-dav-versioning-request@w3.org 
> [mailto:ietf-dav-versioning-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of John Hall
> Sent: Monday, June 18, 2001 8:30 PM
> To: 'Rick Rupp'; ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org
> Subject: RE: [ietf-dav-versioning] <none>
> 
> 
> I disagree.
> 
> I see no difference between creating a new version from 
> scratch and copying data from somewhere else to create a new 
> version from scratch. If I open file1 and then do a save-as 
> on file2, the server doesn't know and precussor isn't set in 
> any case.  So why is it so important to know that someone 
> grabbed a copy of file1's current version and copied it to 
> file2 without editing it first?  If you really want the 
> version history, use MOVE not COPY.
> 
> Do you have a 'for example' use case where that origin 
> information is valuable?  And would it still remain valuable 
> after a few more edits were done?
> 
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: ietf-dav-versioning-request@w3.org
> > [mailto:ietf-dav-versioning-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Rick Rupp
> > Sent: Monday, June 18, 2001 5:39 PM
> > To: ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org
> > Subject: [ietf-dav-versioning] <none>
> > 
> > 
> > The precursor-set property seems to be an important concept
> > of a versions 
> > history. Without it there is no indication that a version has a 
> > relationship to another version history.
> > 
> > I don't think it will be unusual for a client to create a new
> > version by 
> > copying from a different version history. Will it be 
> > important to know the 
> > new version came from a different version history? I think 
> > the answer is 
> > yes and the precursor-set facilitates this.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
>

Received on Tuesday, 19 June 2001 01:45:16 UTC