[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: [CMIS 1.1 Draft Review] CMIS 1.1 Working Draft 02: Retention and Hold
Section : 2.1.14 Retention and Hold „A repository MUST throw a constraint exception if the application is not supported.” Typo: application should be operation here “All secondary types for retention and hold management SHOULD be able to be applied to objects derived from the cmis:document base type. Applying such types to other CMIS objects and its behavior is repository specific…” à Do we have to be more specific here about folders? Proposal: If such a type can be applied to a folder then this is equivalent to applying the type recursively to all children of the folder. Means: Either this is supported then it must be a recursive operation or it must result in a constraint exception. 2.1.14.1 The usage of Repository Managed Retentions allows to support advanced scenarios where à delete the word “advanced” “This specification only defines the classication process, that is applying a Repository Managed Retention to a document. “ wording: put “Repository Managed Retention” in quotes? “Creation and managing the rules and how rules are mapped to file plan categories is…” àEither creation and management or creating and managing Missing: A secondary type derived from cmis:rm:repMgtRetention cannot be removed from an object once it has been assigned. A repository MUST throw a constraint exception in this case. 2.1.14.2.1 Assignment rules: “A specific expiration date MUST NOT be removable replaced by a expiration date not-set. “ è Typo: delete word removable Prolongation rule: The repository must prevent a client from shortening the retention time. è change must to MUST 2.1.14.2.3.2 Property Definitions The Destruction Retentions object-type MUST have the following property definitions, inherits all prop-… è change inherits to MUST inherit 2.1.14.3 Holds “A "hold"assures that a document can be restored to the state it was in when the hold has been applied” è Suggestion: replace “can be restored to the state it was” to “preserve the state it was” (preservation is not enough, usually RM systems allow this even without a hold) à Do we have to be more specific here about folders? Proposal: If a hold can be applied to a folder then this is equivalent to applying the hold recursively to all children of the folder. Means: Either this is supported then it must be a recursive operation or it must result in a constraint exception. Jens |
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]