The version-tree report for version history resources

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
3 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

The version-tree report for version history resources

Werner Donné

Hi,

Shouldn't the version-tree report also apply to version
history resources when the version-history feature is
supported? It seems like the most obvious resource to
ask it to.

Regards,

Werner.
--
Werner Donné  --  Re
Engelbeekstraat 8
B-3300 Tienen
tel: (+32) 486 425803 e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The version-tree report for version history resources

Geoffrey M Clemm

Yes, that would be very reasonable, but note that in practice it is much more likely for the client to have in hand a URL for a VCR or a Version, on which a version-tree report is defined.

Cheers,
Geoff

Werner wrote on 08/31/2006 05:54:58 AM:
> Shouldn't the version-tree report also apply to version
> history resources when the version-history feature is
> supported? It seems like the most obvious resource to
> ask it to.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The version-tree report for version history resources

Geoffrey M Clemm
In reply to this post by Werner Donné

Note: A better answer (:-) would have been:

If your server supports the version-history feature, then the version-tree report is unnecessary, since you can do a DAV:expand-property report on the DAV:version-set.

Cheers,
Geoff

--------------

Yes, that would be very reasonable, but note that in practice it is much more likely for the client to have in hand a URL for a VCR or a Version, on which a version-tree report is defined.


Werner wrote on 08/31/2006 05:54:58 AM:
> Shouldn't the version-tree report also apply to version
> history resources when the version-history feature is
> supported? It seems like the most obvious resource to
> ask it to.