From: Shaun M. <sh...@ae...> - 2004-10-05 18:47:30
|
On 5 Oct 2004, at 17:37, Matthew McNaney wrote: > > In each scenario, we have 5 copies, A B C D and E, with 'E' being the > current version. We want to replace the current version (E) with a > previous version (C). > > Scenario 1 > C is made the current version (becoming 'F'). D and E are removed since > they are after the reversion. The new list is: A B F > > Scenario 2 > C is made the current version (becoming 'F'). The previous version (E) > is added to the reversion list. Our new list is: A B D E F > Sounds more complicated than need be or have I missed something? Scenario 3 You just have an indicator which says which is the current version rather than using an undo/redo stack. All your copies are still there but you've not added F. I'm thinking along the lines of having an announcement with 5 (A -> E) versions in a pull down and you just select which you want to mark as current provided you've the right permissions to change it without the change having to go to Approval. A new version can then be edited whilst a previous version is available with the new version becoming F after going through Approval and A dropping off the list of backups. Is there a reason we can't have unlimited backups rather than 5? Not that I think 5 would be a big problem at all. I'm presuming/hoping there's an audit trail in there somewhere also. Possibly that's the job Approval has to do? ps. Check out Bricolage, hint, hint. http://www.bricolage.cc/ ;-) Shaun aegis design - http://www.aegisdesign.co.uk |