- From: Christopher Seiwald <seiwald@perforce.com>
- Date: Fri, 30 Aug 1996 08:46:11 -0700
- To: murray@sq.com, seiwald@perforce.com
- Cc: dgd@cs.bu.edu, ejw@ics.uci.edu, w3c-dist-auth@w3.org, www-vers-wg@ics.uci.edu
Much has floated around about this that I mean to answer, but for now Murray has posted the most straightforward inquiry. | From: Murray Maloney <murray@sq.com> | Subject: Re: Seiwald Q & A -- "GET for EDIT" cookies | | When a user "checks out" a document for editing, | the revision contrl system "should" record who it | is that is checking out the document so that when | the same user attempts to "check in" the document | there is a mechanism to say "Hey, remember me? I am | checking in the document that I previously checked out | for editing. Here it is." The RCS can verify that it is | the same user that is recorded and proceed, or reject | the action if it is not the same user. | Very close, except I'm not asserting that the revision control system _should_ record anything when a user starts to edit a document. Instead, I say that there are many systems that _do_ record something, and that HTTP _should_ cart around a token ("or cookie" ) of this recorded information. For something like RCS or CVS, the cookie might be only a name and rev of the document. For Clearcase or Perforce, the cookie might be an inscrutable pointer to info in its database. For less version-stringent systems, there may be no cookie at all. | Christopher is asserting that a "cookie" is the best, | if not the only, way to manage the session. Perhaps there is another way? Christopher
Received on Friday, 30 August 1996 11:48:17 UTC