IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Comments on Action:draft-brown-versioning-link-relations-03

Sam Johnston <samj@samj.net> Thu, 26 November 2009 15:50 UTC

Return-Path: <owner-atom-syntax@mail.imc.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-atompub-archive@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-atompub-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 784B83A67FD for <ietfarch-atompub-archive@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 26 Nov 2009 07:50:26 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.423
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.423 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5rnP1ts6-gfu for <ietfarch-atompub-archive@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 26 Nov 2009 07:50:25 -0800 (PST)
Received: from balder-227.proper.com (Balder-227.Proper.COM [192.245.12.227]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8DB943A63C9 for <atompub-archive@ietf.org>; Thu, 26 Nov 2009 07:50:25 -0800 (PST)
Received: from balder-227.proper.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by balder-227.proper.com (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id nAQFcK9o047134 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 26 Nov 2009 08:38:20 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from owner-atom-syntax@mail.imc.org)
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by balder-227.proper.com (8.14.2/8.13.5/Submit) id nAQFcKdb047133; Thu, 26 Nov 2009 08:38:20 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from owner-atom-syntax@mail.imc.org)
X-Authentication-Warning: balder-227.proper.com: majordom set sender to owner-atom-syntax@mail.imc.org using -f
Received: from eu1sys200aog105.obsmtp.com (eu1sys200aog105.obsmtp.com [207.126.144.119]) by balder-227.proper.com (8.14.2/8.14.2) with SMTP id nAQFcFfu047121 for <atom-syntax@imc.org>; Thu, 26 Nov 2009 08:38:19 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from samj@samj.net)
Received: from source ([209.85.216.191]) by eu1sys200aob105.postini.com ([207.126.147.11]) with SMTP ID DSNKSw6g5vE7/AGuZrXS+iZu0zu1e9f2xmGF@postini.com; Thu, 26 Nov 2009 15:38:19 UTC
Received: by pxi29 with SMTP id 29so573333pxi.1 for <atom-syntax@imc.org>; Thu, 26 Nov 2009 07:38:14 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.141.23.5 with SMTP id a5mr542952rvj.108.1259249894157; Thu, 26 Nov 2009 07:38:14 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <4B0E9F14.807@gmx.de>
References: <20091120140001.A7A5D3A6A84@core3.amsl.com> <4B06A41A.2070508@gmx.de> <D2DFC5E4-ED13-4DB4-B7DB-8A4F882186AE@mac.com> <4B0BBB72.1090200@gmx.de> <21606dcf0911240714h7921008egd14f923f474c1483@mail.gmail.com> <4B0E9F14.807@gmx.de>
Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2009 16:38:14 +0100
Message-ID: <21606dcf0911260738o53d4811ch7bfc9baf994eacd@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Comments on Action:draft-brown-versioning-link-relations-03
From: Sam Johnston <samj@samj.net>
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Cc: Jan Algermissen <algermissen1971@mac.com>, Atom-syntax Syntax' <atom-syntax@imc.org>, WebDAV <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000e0cd1b7b89feee0047947f6ad"
Sender: owner-atom-syntax@mail.imc.org
Precedence: bulk
List-Archive: <http://www.imc.org/atom-syntax/mail-archive/>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:atom-syntax-request@imc.org?body=unsubscribe>
List-ID: <atom-syntax.imc.org>

On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 4:30 PM, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>wrote:

> Hi Sam,
>
> I'm not convinced that throwing everything into a single document will be
> helpful; draft-brown-versioning-link-relations tries to focus on a small set
> of things, and, as Jan's feedback shows, it's non-trivial to get even those
> things right.
>

I'm not suggesting throwing everything in one document - just keeping
addressing (permalinks, shortlinks, etc.) separate from versioning. It may
well make more sense to drop relations from
draft-johnston-addressing-link-relations if they are more about versioning
than addressing.


> Do you have any *specific* comments with respect to the relations that it
> proposes?


My first thoughts were that the relations themselves could be more concise:

   - version-history -> versions, history or revisions
   - latest-version -> latest
   - working-copy -> ok
   - predecessor-version -> predecessor or previous-version or prev-version
   (which is it, prev or previous - I think there's some ambiguity here)
   - successor-version -> successor or next-version

I also wonder whether it makes sense to offer links to "native" revision
control (e.g. hg, git, svn, etc.) and/or web interfaces to them - and then
specifics like branches and tags, and what a URI/URL to a branch/tag would
even look like.

Sam

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email