- From: Lisa Dusseault <lisa@xythos.com>
- Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2001 13:32:41 -0700
- To: "DeltaV" <ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org>, "Jim Amsden" <jamsden@us.ibm.com>, "Jim Whitehead" <ejw@cse.ucsc.edu>
> The reason we can't introduce new resource types for all of the > versioning > resources is because we have to support down-level clients that only know > about DAV:collection. For new resources that down-level clients couldn't > possibly know about, workspaces, activities, baselines, etc., we don't > have this restriction. I agree with Greg and Tim. We should be as > specific > as we can about declared type and only compromise when required by > interoperability considerations. I thought we had rather strong guidance that working around bugs in a single implementation was NOT recommended. Clarification, Jim? I'd also point out that frequently it will be OK even with buggy clients to introduce new resource types. For example, I don't suppose it will be that easy for non-versioning-aware clients to stumble across URLs of collections of version-histories, activities, baselines and workspaces. Not all of these new resources are even browsable, and they may not appear in any regular URL space that regular clients are expected to use. lisa
Received on Wednesday, 20 June 2001 16:34:20 UTC