Re: Summary: Ordered Collections

At 04:39 PM 11/30/97 PDT, Jim Whitehead wrote:
>
>This post represents my best effort to summarize the "ordered collections" 
>thread which occurred primarily at the end of October.  Feel free to ammend 
>this post if you feel I have trivialized or misunderstood your position.

This was an excellent summary, and I endorse it all, except for:

> There was some agreement that if you do want 
>to support this capability, you need to allow the creation of new compound 
>documents in one action (the creation using MIME discussion)

which I do not agree with.  I feel it would be nice, but it's not
necessary, by analogy with MKCOL on an ordinary collection.  No one has
claimed that "if you want to suport MKCOL, you need to allow the creation
of compound documents in one action".  It might be more efficient, but
surely it's not crucial?

I would be very supportive of efforts to define means of specifying initial
contents of collections, e.g. by MIME multipart bodies, or some set of
properties.

During the discussion I agreed to produce a formal specification for
ordered collections, which I will do in my next message.

Best regards

Jim


------------------------------------
http://www.parc.xerox.com/jdavis/
650-812-4301

Received on Thursday, 4 December 1997 02:15:37 UTC