[Design] [Cosmo] Reconciling various sharing URLs

[Mimi Yin]

On Sep 18, 2007, at 2:31 PM, Brian Moseley wrote:

> the reason the web ui can't do the second part of that now is that it
> doesn't have any particular knowledge of any specific tickets. it can
> list all of the tickets on the item, and if there's only one read-only
> and/or one read-write ticket, it can just pick those. but what if
> there are more than one of each? which ones are the ones that chandler
> created when you published the collection originally? what if there
> are none? can the ui just pick two and use them? does it matter if
> those are the ones created by chandler or if they were created by some
> other application?

I wonder if it's so important to match up the tickets with the  
Chandler Desktop tickets. Most of the time I imagine Chandler users  
will only have 2 tickets anyway. In the cases where they don't, they  
will have created them manually through the Account Browser. I think  
we can just display all the tickets and let users figure out which  
ones they want to use. That's what we have to do in the Account  
Browser today.

>
> we might be able to solve that problem by re-defining how we think of
> tickets. instead of allowing an arbitrary number of tickets to be
> issued for a collection, maybe we should only allow one of each type
> and have them automatically created when the collection is created.
> that way, assuming you're the person who published the collection,
> whenever you use desktop or web you can always ask the server to see
> the single read-only ticket for the collection and you can reliably
> construct a single sharing (/pim) url to give to others or to use
> yourself to subscribe in another desktop instance.

That would simplify things.