- From: Elias <elias@cse.ucsc.edu>
- Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2003 16:59:59 -0800
- To: www-webdav-dasl@w3.org
- Message-id: <3E4C3F8F.4080706@cse.ucsc.edu>
Julian Reschke wrote: >>From: www-webdav-dasl-request@w3.org On Behalf Of E. Sinderson >> >>I would like to put forth the following: >> >>If a server that doesn't support Delta-V recieves a client query that >>specifies <d:include-versions/> it SHOULD honor the request as if >><d:include-versions/> wasn't specified. >> >> >That was at least the intent. In particular, even *if* a server supports >versioning, there may be resources in scope that are not version-controlled. >A server that doesn't support DeltaV would just behave the same way as a >DeltaV-aware server where all resources in scope happen not to be >version-controlled. > Agreed, thanks for clarifying. :-) >>The logic is that if a server has a version (the only version) of a >> >> >resource > > >>in the query scope then it can easily include all the versions it knows >>about. This approach will lessen the number of round trips needed to get a >>successful response. The implementation is simple and shouldn't break >>existing servers. >> >> >Could you rephrase that? I'm not sure I understand.... > The situation I was trying to convey is essentially the situation you described above, where a Delta-V enabled server has unversioned resources in the scope of the query. It follows that if a given server doesn't support versioning at all then it should behave the same way when processing a query with <include-versions/> specified. I was simply identifying the commonality between the two cases... Cheers, Elias
Received on Thursday, 13 February 2003 19:56:03 UTC