I  agree with Jeffry that branching a R/O shared item so that one can
make annotations and yet not breach the read-only permission of the
shared original is something important we need to have, whether by the
1st Preview release or later. To me what's important if I share an
item read-only is,  I don't want others modifying that item in MY
collection. I fully realize that anyone with R/O access to the item
can copy and paste that information into a shared read-write
collection of her own, however any changes to that derivative work do
not modify my original.

Pieter

On 3/14/07, Brian Moseley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 3/14/07, Katie Capps Parlante <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Is there general agreement that this solution is the preferred solution
> in the long term? (which of course does not necessarily mean that we
> should tackle it for Preview). What is the scope of this solution?

i think that per-item access controls (more specifically, permissions
per item/collection relationship) is the way to go. randy, bobby and i
discussed it in cosmo-dev after i mentioned how opposed i was to
morgen's suggestion from earlier in this thread.

it's a hard problem, and i think we'd be shooting ourselves in the
foot to try to solve it before preview. however, i think we can solve
it with a significant amount of work. i think we have a pretty decent
fundamental model for it, but we don't have a handle on what it will
mean for the various protocols and internal cosmo apis.
_______________________________________________
cosmo-dev mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/cosmo-dev

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Open Source Applications Foundation "Design" mailing list
http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/design

Reply via email to