RE: Reminder: WG Last Call on Ordered Collections

> From: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org
> [mailto:w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Clemm, Geoff
> Sent: Tuesday, April 29, 2003 11:27 PM
> To: 'WebDAV'
> Subject: RE: Reminder: WG Last Call on Ordered Collections
>
>
>
> The "principle of regularity" states that if a moved resource is moved to
> the end of the ordering in some cases, it is more regular for it
> to be moved
> to the end of the ordering in all cases, and not make the
> behavior dependent
> on whether the destination collection is the same as the source
> collection.
>
> For folks that expect regularity, it will be "less astonishing" for the
> behavior to be regular, and not special-cased in the way you suggest.
>
> Note this just explains my rationale.  I personally don't have a strong
> preference either way.

Yes.

To summarize the possible variations:

1) specify that a MOVE inside a collection does not add a new member -> in
this case a "rename" operation won't change ordering, but will be completely
inconsistent with the cross-collection MOVE (where a new member *is* added
and thus the Position header semantics apply)

2) specify that a MOVE inside a collection removes the old and adds a new
member -> consistency with cross-collection MOVE operation, but ordering
will be lost when done by a client that isn't aware of ordering semantics

3) do not mandate a specific behaviour (the current wording) -- in which
case we'd still need to decide whether spec needs to be more specific about
this being server-defined behaviour.

I think in doubt we should consider simplicity of the spec as well,
therefore leave things as they are and possibly make that more explicit.

Julian


--
<green/>bytes GmbH -- http://www.greenbytes.de -- tel:+492512807760

Received on Wednesday, 30 April 2003 12:55:05 UTC