- From: Judith Slein <slein@wrc.xerox.com>
- Date: Thu, 20 Feb 1997 11:50:33 PST
- To: Jim Whitehead <ejw@ics.uci.edu>
- Cc: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
If we let our terminology be "version tree" and "member of a version tree", the requirements start looking something like this: 4.9.2.1. Referring to a version tree. There should be a way to refer to a version tree as a whole. Some queries do not apply only to one member of a version tree, but to the version tree as a whole. Furthermore, some operations may affect all members of the tree, rather than any specific member. In these cases, a way to refer to the whole version tree is required. 4.9.2.2. Referring to specific members of a version tree. There should be a way to refer to each member of a version tree. This means that each member of the tree is itself a resource. This is required for version-specific linking, and for non-versioning client support. And so on . . . OK? --Judy At 09:52 AM 2/20/97 PST, Jim Whitehead wrote: >>>Thus, the language in the specification, from Section 9.2 "Versioning Data >>>Model" should be used in the requirements. >> >>My problem with this is that the spec's usage seems counterintuitive. I >>think it will confuse people. To me it seems natural to say that a node in >>a version tree is a version (not a versioned resource). A versioned >>resource is a resource that has versions -- it's not any one of the >>versions. So I guess the closest thing to a versioned resource is the tree >>handle. > >Well, while I agree with you that the language in the spec. is probably not >intuitive, I'm not fond of just using the term "version" for a node in a >version tree. Since it took the group awhile to agree that a node in a >version tree is also a first-class resource, I'd like our terminology for >the node in a version tree to reflect this. > >I'm also not fond of saying that a node in a version tree is a "version of >a resource." This is because we may allow an individual resource to be a >member of more than one version tree, and because it may imply (for people >used to file-based versioning systems like RCS) that the version is not a >first-class resource. > >I'm tempted to bypass this terminology thicket and coin a new term, like >"movert," "movet," or "MVT," which is just an acronym for "member of a >version tree." > >- Jim > > > > > Name: Judith A. Slein E-Mail: slein@wrc.xerox.com Internal Phone: 8*222-5169 External Phone: (716) 422-5169 Fax: (716) 265-7133 MailStop: 128-29E
Received on Thursday, 20 February 1997 18:43:53 UTC