What a thrill this package is, eh? 😉
I totally agree with the suggested swap of item.name and revision.title attributes - the current implementation is indeed bizarre. But didn't it in fact become this bizarre because developers have been trying to adapt to the even more fundamentally bizarre current "Add a Revision" behavior:
When you upload a file, why must it then be possible to upload *another* file and call it a revision of the first file instead of just calling it another file? If you really want to upload a revision of a file, then it would seem rather natural to upload an edited version of the same file (having the same name, per definition) ...
If we could make file storage resemble a traditional file system, with the additional features of revisioning and the ability to give the revisions titles and descriptions, the package would seem more logical to users and developers alike, IMHO.
Just a minor clarification:
"This relies on the user of the package to type in the title the same as the filename."
It's true that the title has to be the same as the file name when you upload a file and you want to have relative linking functioning, but you don't actually have to type the title. If you leave it blank the title becomes the same as the file name.
