Re: On standardization

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
• Next message: Larry Masinter: "Re: Versions and configurations"
• Previous message: Scot Malloy: "Re: Version identifier in URL"
• Maybe in reply to: Jim Whitehead: "On standardization"

At 6:57 PM 5/30/96, Jim Whitehead wrote:
>However, since one goal or our work is to ensure that version-aware
>browsers and distributed editors are *interoperable*, it makes sense to
>develop a standard (in the normative sense) convention for naming
>individual versions of an entity.

Earlier David J. Fiander wrote:
>>What I want to standardise, in the first step is ";version=opaque
>>revision id".  No more, no less...

As long as we remember that what's on the right of the = must remain
opaque; it's the VC/CM system that will interpret it. This group can
standardize a convention (";version=") but not a syntax ("opaque
revision id") for naming individual versions of an entity.

--Keith

• Next message: Larry Masinter: "Re: Versions and configurations"
• Previous message: Scot Malloy: "Re: Version identifier in URL"
• Maybe in reply to: Jim Whitehead: "On standardization"