- From: Sankar Virdhagriswaran <sv@crystaliz.com>
- Date: Mon, 29 Sep 1997 10:31:12 -0400
- To: "Fisher Mark" <FisherM@exch1.indy.tce.com>, <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>
I finally found some time to respond to some of the questions that were raised by Fisher and others. 1. Configuration support is research. (Fisher Mark) Take a look at products like ClearCase, Continuum, AutoDesk WorkCenter, Ours (Concorde), Documentum, etc. 2. If support for collections is provided is configuration addressed (Andre van der Hoek). Perhaps. Not having read the most recent draft that Jim put out it is hard for me to say. What is important is to provide collection relative addressing. For example, when I check-out for /foo/bar/baz.html, what is returned is /foo/bar/baz.html.1. Here the baz.html is actually considered a collection of versions. I should note that the above example is only one way of doing configurations (as Jim has pointed out). In fact, if I remember the collection discussion between Yaron and Judith, this is the only possibility (i.e., no selection of a particular version based on properties of the document). Yaron or Judith should correct me if I am wrong on collections. 3. How does configurations affect the protocol (Larry Masinter) The operation of check-out/check-in changes dramatically when you allow configuration relative addressing. The above example should explain it. It also affects the protocol because the client has to tell the server the context (i.e., configuration) in which the current name (in the previous example baz.html) has to be resolved.
Received on Monday, 29 September 1997 11:10:35 UTC