- From: <edgar@edgarschwarz.de>
- Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2004 21:24:56 +0100 (MET)
- To: ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org
- Cc: edgar@edgarschwarz.de
Alison Macmillan <alison.macmillan@oracle.com> wrote: > The second option looks better to me, i.e. > - disallow the checkin of an unreserved checkout if there is a reserved checkout > as I think the first condition would need to be: > - disallow a reserved checkout if there is already an unreserved checkout, > and disallow an unreserved checkout if there is already a reserved checkout. > which restricts parallel development. Agreed. > Section 13.3.1 of the spec says: > 13.3.1 DAV:unreserved > This property of a checked-out resource indicates whether the > DAV:activity-set of another checked-out resource associated with the > version history of this version-controlled resource can have an > activity that is in the DAV:activity-set property of this checked-out > resource. First I wonder why we think negative. I think it would be more natural to make an editorial change to DAV:reserved and depreceate DAV:unreserved. Also here DAV:unreserved is tied to the activity feature. I feel it already makes sense without activities (Which for me implies that there is a single implicit default activity). Cheers, Edgar
Received on Tuesday, 23 March 2004 15:25:04 UTC