Gee, Tim, you and I independently made the
exact same points (though you used fewer words).
Great minds think alike. And so do ours. J
Richard
From: alf-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:alf-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Tim Buss
Sent: Wednesday, May 03, 2006
10:21 AM
To: ALF
Developer Mailing List
Subject: RE: [alf-dev] ALF SCM
Vocabulary compared to WebDAVVersioningExtensions
One issue is that WebDAV is not a SOAP
based web service and is not (probably cannot be) described by WSDL.
Thus it isn't directly usable from BPEL. (should double check to be sure
I'm not missing something)
I have a general impression that the
versioning part of WebDAV has had mixed acceptence and spotty implementation
but I'll leave it to others to expand on that.
Both WebDAV and JSR are client oriented
and have the same "workspace" issue that we need to address to avoid
streaming files through the BPEL engine.
Thus I believe neither is directly
applicable although clearly they are both good sources to leverage and validate
against. It would be a good exercise to reference the equivalent concepts
and operarations of these two sources in our document.
Tim
From:
alf-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:alf-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Everitt, Glenn
Sent: Wednesday, May 03, 2006 5:57
AM
To: alf-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [alf-dev] ALF SCM
Vocabulary compared to WebDAV VersioningExtensions
The document Versioning Extensions to WebDAV (Web Distributed Authoring and Versioning) I found here http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3253.txt
has a section of Term definitions which is very close to what has been proposed which seems very good. It also looks like WebDAV has already been implemented by some SCM products. I don’t know how complete these implementations are but again, this seems like good news.
But I have a couple of other questions related to this:
1. Why doesn’t JSR 147 doesn’t reference the document above it seems like they address identical areas.
2. Is it possible for an ALF managed BPEL script to be written using existing WebDAV support already in SCM products?
3. If 2 above is true then should we base our vocabulary as directly as possible on the existing WebDAV standard?
I know nothing about WebDAV and only know about SCM systems from a user perspective so these are probably naïve questions. However, I am curious.
Thanks for any information
Glenn Everitt (Corona
Project)
The contents of this e-mail are intended for the named addressee only.
It contains information that may be confidential. Unless you are the named
addressee or an authorized designee, you may not copy or use it, or disclose it
to anyone else. If you received it in error please notify us immediately and
then destroy it.
**********************************************************************
This email and any files transmitted
with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or
entity to whom they are addressed. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or
distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please
contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original
message.