- From: James J. Hunt <jjh@ira.uka.de>
- Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 15:55:57 +0100
- To: ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org
Dear Colleagues, There seem to be some confusion in the protocol description as to for what Labels are good. At least the example is misleading. A label with the name released is in general not useful, because released has the character of status and a file may have only one revision with the label released. Over the course of time several versions will be "released". A better example would be the label release_3.1. Since there are revision control systems that support a status property, it would make sense to support it explicitly as an option. Status can not be implemented as a dead property for two reason: 1) a versioned resource or working resource that is updated or created by a check-out request should NOT inherit the value of the status of the version being checked out, instead it should be set to a server defined base value or left empty; and 2) status should be changeable on a version without creating a new version, similar to label. Systems that implement both base-lines and status should provide a status for base-lines. The value of status should be an NMTOKEN. Sincerely, James J. Hunt Jürgen Reuter
Received on Friday, 2 February 2001 09:56:02 UTC