W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org > October to December 2000

RE: Rationale for DAV:if-unsupported?

From: Jim Whitehead <ejw@cse.ucsc.edu>
Date: Fri, 3 Nov 2000 10:56:49 -0800
To: <ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org>
Message-ID: <NDBBIKLAGLCOPGKGADOJIEDMDNAA.ejw@cse.ucsc.edu>
> Just for the record, you were the one that requested this feature
> originally, but I'll take over its defense (:-).

D'oh!

> This is here for extensibility.  We will undoubtebly be adding new
> parameters to the various commands over time, and a server needs to
> know if it is something it can ignore or not.

OK, seems reasonable.

> But I don't care much, so I'll go ahead and make the change if nobody
> else cares.  Note: I'll make it "must-support", since a server can
> understand a feature but not support it, and it is the support that
> the client cares about.

I like must-support.

> I don't follow you.  What would a client ever do differently if
> it encounters a DAV:must-support coming from the server?

Hypothetically, it might make sense to include this in a property value, so
the client knows its should not believe it understands the value of the
property unless it also understands the element.

More than anything though, the lack of symmetry is what bothers me.  If it's
a general XML feature, why limit it to a single direction of message flow?

> OK, I'm happy to get rid of the inheritance requirement.

OK.

- Jim
Received on Friday, 3 November 2000 13:57:30 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 13:57:39 GMT