- From: Bernard Chester <BernardC@saros.com>
- Date: Mon, 11 Nov 1996 16:43:15 -0800
- To: "'w3c-dist-auth@w3.org'" <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>
Well, I thought that I would have my comments to 0.1 out a week ago, but my responsibilities elsewhere (like to getting DMA 1.0 out) took precedence. I've read the new draft and consolidated my comments below. Please note that my expertise is with information management systems and DMA, not HTTP and HTML. I promise to complete my review HTTP 1.1 and HTML 3.2 before Thursday if I attend. You do appear to be asking the same questions that I've heard in Shamrock and DMA meetings for years; maybe Dennis and some of the other DMA folks attending can help you avoid re-inventing the wheel. Comments: 1.2 Terminology Checkout and Checkin (see below) How does this differ from Lock and Unlock? I get the impression (am almost certain) that you are using these verbs in a manner different from the document management industry. 2.1 Attr. Hdr URIs Your attribute naming scheme would seem to have the following problems: 1- They seem to be language/locale dependent strings. This can be seen to be "English-arrogant". In DMA we eliminated those problems by using DCE GUIDs, and let the associated display string be able to language/locale related.Yes, I know that GUIDs are ugly and long. But you avoid the need for a central name clearinghouse. 2- If you like, pick a shorter scheme for "Well-knowns". For interoperability, you are well advised to publish a list of well-knowns, beyond section 2.3. I don't want to discover that my tool doesn't understand the standard attribs of a page because it was created with a different product. 3- Same issues occur with your prefixes. No need with GUID-type scheme. 4- Do you have any thoughts about who would be the clearinghouse in your approach? 2.2.1 GET Sounds like I have to independently GET every attribute value, as an operation separate from getting the content. Low performance approach; why can't I ask for multiple items in one request? I'd like to see a way to get the complete package in one request (or at least, one response). 2.2.2 HEAD Why not extend HEAD to allow retrieval of the entire Attribute Set? ?Why not extend HTTP with new verbs? 2.3 Std Attributes Are these required to be supported? SiteMaps are not yet an accepted mechanism of HTML; this specification is dependent on them. What are other alternatives? I'd like to be able to operate on std containment approaches, such as directorys and links/shortcuts, as containers. I need to take some time to explain the various approaches that I've seen. Search: A 'page' will need to know and return the URL of a page that permits searching? Searching for what and over what domain / collection? How would I use this? 3. Lock/Unlock In the DMA view, you've combined access control with versioning behavior. Personally, I think you'd better look at a richer scheme. There is an important reason for the difference: Access Control dictates who has permission to perform an operation; Authoring & Versioning is an activity specifically related to the modification of content and attributes, and the introduction of new versions. By separating the two, I avoid confusion between the information management and the information maintenance activities. [IMHO, I believe it makes it easier to implement also] Many current products only support a single Editor, but a larger set of possible Editors. I am unclear how I can tell the difference between making a new person capable of editting versus his actually being in the process of editting and needing control over the document state. Do I have the ability to have multiple independent write locks active at the same time? Current implementations permit multiple branched versions. What do you think should be the behavior on the end document(s)? Lock Ownership and Contact information cannot be required. This information is often privileged. The privilege may not be tied to who has access to the document. 4. Name Space Manipulation 4.2 I am uncomfortable with your redefinition of delete. How is this different from an unlock? Is this equivalent to a rollback of changes? 6. Notifications ?You've specified a standard way to request notifications, but no standard way under HTTP to (a) receive them, (b) their format? Wouldn't they be the response to the next HTTP request? (You haven't provided for contact information here, so I guess SMTP is out of the question as a notification approach?!) 8&9. Versioning I don't understand your versioning model. Please answer the following as a start: (1) can I see multiple versions of a document? if true, How do I address them? if false, I strongly disagree. (2) When a document is being revised, as a reader, can I see the in-transition document? (3) Checkout and locks seem used in reverse. Why is it that I don't checkout a document, and then lock/unlock all or part of the document as I work. Then complete with a checkin. This would allow multiple simultaneous editors of a version (collaboration). In this view, a checkout is still a declaration of intent to edit. (4) Is Checkout a Lock+Get combination? Checkin a PUT+Unlock? If they aren't compound operations, what are they? Bernard Chester Saros / FileNet bernardc@saros.com
Received on Monday, 11 November 1996 19:41:18 UTC