From: Lisa Dusseault [mailto:lisa@xythos.com] I second what Jim's saying. Furthermore, I'd point out that server implementations differ. Servers may not implement all live properties or methods that a client expects. Some servers may add new, custom live properties. Does that change the type and make the client unable to confidently deal with the resource? A server can't say it supports a resource type unless it supports all the behavior and properties specified for that resource within the bounds offered by its options as specified in the spec. So I don't support the notion of using DAV:resourcetype as a way of indicating support for a resource type without implementing all its required properties and methods. Servers aren't that free in claiming support for the protocol. Adding new custom live properties is OK though as this is just defining a subtype.Received on Thursday, 21 June 2001 15:17:05 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 13:57:41 GMT