- From: John Stracke <francis@ecal.com>
- Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2000 12:18:09 -0500
- To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
- CC: ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org
"Geoffrey M. Clemm" wrote: > A third alternative was suggested at the recent IETF meeting > by Roy Fielding, namely, that the "update" behavior was actually > the behavior intended for COPY with Overwrite:T, so the > right thing to do is to make this clarification in the > versioning protocol, rather than introducing a new "update" value > for Overwrite or a new Update header. Should this be in the versioning protocol, or in an update to 2518? (Or is it intended that the versioning RFC update 2518?) -- /==============================================================\ |John Stracke | http://www.ecal.com |My opinions are my own.| |Chief Scientist |=============================================| |eCal Corp. |Belief is not relevant to truth. | |francis@ecal.com| | \==============================================================/
Received on Thursday, 21 December 2000 12:13:39 UTC