- From: Tim Ellison <Tim_Ellison@uk.ibm.com>
- Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2001 08:42:26 +0100
- To: ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org
"Lisa Dusseault" <lisa@xythos.com> wrote: > So are we back to saying that supporting Working Resource > feature requires also supporting UPDATE? That's what I'm > trying to avoid. Is there a better way for these two > features to not depend on each other? No I'm not saying that. I have an application in mind that creates versions and doesn't update any version-controlled resource. It always references the versions by their version URL. In this case there is no need for DAV:auto-update or an UPDATE method, so I would object to making them required. > Furthermore, it's surprising to me, and perhaps to clients > as well, that working resource checkins and in-place > checkins work so differently: one ends up with the VCR > pointing to the latest version at the end, and the other > doesn't (by default). I would expect the default behaviour > of both of these to be the same. In the case of a working resource created directly from a version, there is no version-controlled resource to update on CHECKIN. So it doesn't seem too surpising to me, but whatever. > Perhaps Jim's proposal could instead be worded so that > auto-update was the default, and "do not update" is the > exceptional behaviour that the client must request. That would require setting the DAV:auto-update value, or passing in the URL of the version-controlled resource during CHECKIN. I prefer to leave the proposal as is. Regards, Tim
Received on Friday, 13 July 2001 03:42:26 UTC