RE: comment

I don't believe that the multiple comment strings were intended
for property content negotiation, but rather to allow you
to put comments in multiple languages on a resource which does
not have multiple language variants.  This could help support
searching for a document in multiple languages, even if the 
document itself is in only one language.

I agree with Greg's point that a version is unlikely to have
comments in multiple languages, but this property is intended
for an arbitrary resource, not just for version resources.

The reason this property (and DAV:creator-displayname) are
specified this way is that they can take natural language
values, which is not the case for the versioning specific
properties.

So I guess I see some benefit, with minimal cost.  To make
sure I haven't missed anything, is there any cost to this
extra layer of XML, other than a few extra bytes?

Cheers,
Geoff

-----Original Message-----
From: Tim_Ellison@uk.ibm.com [mailto:Tim_Ellison@uk.ibm.com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2001 9:38 AM
To: ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org
Subject: RE: comment




I agree with Eric that this approach for internationalizing individual
properties is flawed, and that the change shoud be reversed.

Regards,

Tim Ellison
Java Technology Centre, MP146
IBM UK Laboratory, Hursley Park, Winchester, UK.
tel: +44 (0)1962 819872  internal: 249872  MOBx: 270452


"Eric Sedlar" <Eric.Sedlar@oracle.com> on 2001-01-23 05:25:58 PM

Please respond to "Eric Sedlar" <Eric.Sedlar@oracle.com>

To:   Tim Ellison/UK/IBM@IBMGB, ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org
cc:
Subject:  RE: comment




I've just been looking into how to handle content negotiation, and I
haven't seen any implementation where content identified by a single
URL can handle multiple languages without redirection.  In other words,
if my file has Dutch content, and I'm a French user, I need to be sent
to another URL with the French version of that content (usually by the
language extension on the filename).  That other resource would have the
property values (like DAV:comment) in the correct language, presumably.

Therefore, I think there is no need to worry about internationalization
of string properties of a resource--they're going to be localized.  This
change should be reversed.

--Eric

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ietf-dav-versioning-request@w3.org
> [mailto:ietf-dav-versioning-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of
> Tim_Ellison@uk.ibm.com
> Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2001 5:17 AM
> To: ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org
> Subject: DAV:comment
>
>
>
>
>
> >   23.1.1 DAV:comment
> >     Why do we have an extra DAV:string element?
> >     Why can you have any number of them (how would a client
> >    choose which one to display)?
> >
> > This was a change requested by Yaron to support
> > internationalization.  You can have the comment
> > string in multiple languages this way.
>
> I'll defer to those who are much more HTTP/XML-versed than I am, but I
> would imagine that this would be a matter of content negotiation between
> the client and server.
>
> Tim
>
>
>

Received on Thursday, 25 January 2001 00:45:58 UTC