Hi Brian, > i disagree that you should be able to change the actual existing > attributes of an item you shared read-only. that completely defeats > the purpose of read-only permissions. > > i'm all for allowing you to make notes about an item that are only > visible to you, or maybe even override an item's attributes again for > you only, but as you point out, that's a different thing altogether. > > as a step along the path to a different eventuality, i think your > suggestion is even more wrong, because not only does it contradict the > read-only nature of the access specified by the sharer, but it sets an > expectation that would be once again contradicted when the final > solution iss put in place.
If we let people override items locally, great. We could model that as a new item that references the original. Implementing that in the desktop client might be tricky, we'd need to set things up so new references to the original get assigned to the replacement. Still, I think that would bridge between the feature flexibility I want and the security model you (and I, lest you think I don't care :) ) want. Sincerely, Jeffrey _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Open Source Applications Foundation "Design" mailing list http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/design
