- From: <jamsden@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2000 17:29:20 -0400
- To: w3c-dist-auth@w3c.org
COPY has to depend on what you requested to copy. If its a working resource, you should get a new, unversioned resource. If its a revision, you should get a new unversioned resource of that revision. If its a versioned resource, you should probably get the whole history. But that maybe we should dissallow copy on versioned resources? |--------+----------------------------------> | | "Tim Ellison/OTT/OTI" | | | <Tim_Ellison@oti.com> | | | Sent by: | | | ietf-dav-versioning-requ| | | est@w3.org | | | | | | | | | 04/03/2000 03:15 PM | | | | |--------+----------------------------------> >---------------------------------------------------------------------| | | | To: ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org | | cc: | | Subject: COPY semantics | >---------------------------------------------------------------------| (I've posed this question before, but it didn't get much discussion...) What does COPY mean for a versioned resource? Options might be: (1) create a new versioned resource at the destination whose initial revision is the same as the revision selected by the source, (2) copy all the history of the source to a new versioned resource at the destination, (3) make a new unversioned resource that has looks like the selected source (i.e., looses it's versioned status). Then how does that differ if the selected resource is a working resource? We disallow a working resource without a corresponding versioned resource with at least an initial revision. Option (1) seems the most likely candidate to me. Tim
Received on Monday, 3 April 2000 17:33:18 UTC