Jürgen,

that sounds a bit like you could model that type of resource as "redirect
reference" [1], right?

Julian

[1]
<http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/draft-ietf-webdav-redirectref-protocol-02.
html>

--
<green/>bytes GmbH -- http://www.greenbytes.de -- tel:+492512807760

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Pill, Juergen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, March 28, 2003 11:52 AM
> To: 'Slide Users Mailing List'
> Subject: RE: properties and linknodes
>
>
> Hello Wojtek,
>
> The Bind standard does not distinguish between the original
> created resource
> (url) and the next URL created via a BIND command. This means, that a
> resource may be created with say "uri1" and a bind may attach say "uri2".
> If the resource under "uri1" (better say the bind) is deleted,
> only the bind
> is deleted, the resource is keep and "uri2" will still point fully
> functional to the resource. When "uri2" is deleted (better the bind) the
> server is free the garbage collect the resource itself (content and
> properties).
>
> The link object in Slide is a distinct resource. Currently we believe that
> the link resource can not be used in implementing the BIND
> standard. If this
> would be true, the link object would be an extension of the Slide
> API, which
> could be used in the functionality you would require (link contains own
> properties or they point to the properties of the resource, or the link
> properties are the properties of the resource, excluding those properties
> the link directly contains).
>
> Does this make sense?
>
>
> Best regards,
>
> Juergen
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nowe media [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Freitag, 28. März 2003 09:17
> To: Slide Users Mailing List
> Subject: Re: properties and linknodes
>
> I have found the RCF concerning DAV binding (LinkNodes).
>
> As they say:
>
> "A method submitted through one URI mapping, on success, MUST produce
>   the same results as the same method, with the same headers and entity
>   body, submitted through any other URI mapping to the same resource."
>
> Which means we should ALWAYS get the properties of the target node ....
>
> The problem goes back to the ordering of nodes, which I want to implement
> the following way:
>
> 1. Set "order" attribute to each child node in a childer collection
> 2. Retrieve all child nodes first and order them in memory using
> the "order"
> attirbute
>
> Here is the problem:
>
> When I am ordering a collection in which one element is a
> LinkNode it makes
> a difference wheather I get the "order" attribute of the LinkNode
> or of the
> target node. When I want to sort the collection and one of the "order"
> attributes comes from a target node the whole sort process fails
> and has no
> sense at all.
>
> regards
>
> Wojtek
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "James Higginbotham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Slide Users Mailing List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2003 8:14 PM
> Subject: RE: properties and linknodes
>
>
> > Don't know too much about the spec area in question, but from a
> developer's POV.. If you get a resource and it's a link, then query the
> props if you want the link props. Otherwise, resolve the link and get the
> actual resource and its props. It will more than likely be based on the
> context of your application. With that said, I hope that's how it
> works such
> that it is deterministic in how the properties are returned via the
> respective APIs. Can't add there, just logically thinking this
> out.. I need
> to read the specs in more depth when time allows.. Easy 'nuff to check
> though - search the RFCs.
> >
> > James
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Michael Plomer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2003 1:09 PM
> > > To: 'Slide Users Mailing List'
> > > Subject: AW: properties and linknodes
> > >
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > that mainly depends on your application, doesn't it?
> > >
> > > In general, I'd say that if I retrieve a property (say, the creation
> > > date) of
> > > a link node, I'd like to know when the link was created, not
> > > the target itself.
> > >
> > > Come to think of it, maybe it depends on the property you're
> > > reading and your application. In the above example, the
> > > creation date of the link may be of interest, but also the
> > > creation date of the target. If, on the other hand, you want
> > > to retrieve the content length, you sure want the length of
> > > the target. At least I don't see a point in associating a
> > > content length with a link node...
> > >
> > > Maybe you could provide more information on what you are
> > > trying to achieve?
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Michał
> > >
> > > >>-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> > > >>Von: nowe media [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > >>Gesendet: Donnerstag, 27. März 2003 17:27
> > > >>An: Slide Users Mailing List
> > > >>Betreff: properties and linknodes
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>Hi !
> > > >>
> > > >>How should properties of  link node be treated.
> > > >>If I am retriveing a property from link node should I get the
> > > >>properties of
> > > >>the link or the properties of the link target ??
> > > >>Does any specification cover this subject ?
> > > >>
> > > >>regards
> > > >>
> > > >>Wojtek
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>------------------------------------------------------------
> > > ---------
> > > >>To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > >>For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > >
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >
> > >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> >
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to