Re: Revision Marks (was) Re: Commit (HEAD): SDW: Metadata

From: Tomas Frydrych (
Date: Fri May 17 2002 - 15:44:33 EDT

  • Next message: Mike Nordell: "Re: Disconcerting Compiler Warnings"

    Hi David,

    > > The way you avoid conflicts of the type "I mark it as deleted and
    > > you put it back in", is that, while in the revisions mode, you do
    > > not allow a text marked as to be deleted to be un-marked, instead
    > > the person who wants it back would have to retype it.
    > This doesn't strike me as particularly user-friendly.

    It is exactly how Word works, so I expect that is what the users
    would expect / put up with. But then why not do it better.

    > I'd like a revision-stet attribute, which you add when you say that you don't
    > like a particular revision. If that revision level is active, then the
    > revision is nixed, although you should be able to see that it was
    > made.

    That will only work up to 3 changes to the same text, but we could
    allow the revision-remove and revision-add attributes to carry
    multiple revision ID's, and this way we could achieve an infinite
    depth of such changes even without the revision-stet attribute.
    What I am not sure about is how to indicate in the text, in a
    sensible way, the number of actual changes associate with a
    particular piece of text. The advantage of my previous suggestion
    was that you never had a piece of text belonging to more than two
    revisions, but I am sure we can come up with something.


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri May 17 2002 - 15:53:22 EDT