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

Re: PROPFIND vs REPORT

From: Geoffrey M. Clemm <geoffrey.clemm@rational.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2000 11:59:44 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <200012181659.LAA02404@tantalum.atria.com>
To: ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org

   From: "Jim Amsden" <jamsden@us.ibm.com>

   <greg>PROPFIND is for fetching properties. REPORT is for fetching
   information about the server, its layout/organization, for multiple
   disparate resources and data, etc.</greg>

   The spec currently says REPORT is for fetching properties of a resource
   that require additional parameters, PROPFIND for properties that don't
   require parameters. So why not just add the parameters to PROPFIND? 

To be precise, the spec currently says REPORT is for obtaining
"information" about a resource.  I personally find the idea of a
"parameterized property" a bit of a stretch, but might be willing
to make that stretch except for the DTD problem I pointed out in
an earlier message.

So I'm currently in the "have a REPORT method" camp.

   We're getting many requests to reduce the number of methods. While I'm
   not always sympathetic to this, REPORT looks like a good candidate. The
   WebDAV working group seemed to prefer this approach. What do others
   think?

Actually, I think the requests are to add *no* new methods, not to
reduce the number of methods.  I don't think anyone has said that it
helps them to add a smaller number of methods (i.e. if you're adding
one, you can add an arbitrary number).

Cheers,
Geoff
Received on Monday, 18 December 2000 12:00:32 GMT

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