W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org > April to June 2001


From: Jim Amsden <jamsden@us.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2001 15:16:55 -0400
To: ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org
Message-ID: <OFF650F62F.12ACE1CD-ON85256A72.00690DBC@raleigh.ibm.com>
   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 
Received on Thursday, 21 June 2001 15:17:05 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:55:47 UTC