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

RE: What is a supported property?

From: Mark Chu-Carroll <mcc@watson.ibm.com>
Date: 22 Jun 2001 14:35:23 -0400
To: "Clemm," Geoff <gclemm@rational.com>
Cc: Ietf-Dav-Versioning <ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org>
Message-Id: <993234924.1354.1.camel@taliesin.watson.ibm.com>
On 22 Jun 2001 14:03:17 -0400, Clemm, Geoff wrote:
> 
>    From: Stefan Eissing [mailto:stefan.eissing@greenbytes.de]
> 
>    All this resourcetype and state thing aside:
>    What is a supported property?
> 
> Excellent question!  This should be made clearer in the spec.
> How about the following:
> 
> -------------
> 
> 3.1.3	DAV:supported-method-set (protected)
> 
> This property identifies the methods that are supported by the
> resource.  A method is supported by a resource if an application of
> that method to that resource has the semantics defined for that
> method by the features supported by that resource.
> 
> 3.1.4	DAV:supported-live-property-set (protected)
> 
> This property identifies the live properties that are supported by
> the resource.  A live property is supported by a resource if that
> property has the semantics defined for that property by the
> features supported by that resource.

From following the whole discussion, I can see what you're trying to get
at, but that wording is incredibly confusing. If I saw that in a 
specification with no further explanation, I'd have no idea of
what it meant. 

It's even misleading: "a live property is supported ... if that
property has the semantics defined for that property ...". It reads like
the property must exist for the resource - and yet, what we're talking
about is the set of properties which *can*, but may not currently, exist
for the resource. 

I *think* that the meaning of a supported property is the following
(which is very close to what you said, but unfortunately re-introduces
that dangerous "type" word). 
	
	A live property is supported for a given resource if, according
	to the semantics of the resource type, that property may
	exist for that resource.

Assuming that I'm right about what it means, that's not a difficult
concept, but it's hard to find a precise way of wording it that 
doesn't appear circular.

	-Mark
 
--
  "There's nothing I like better than the sound of a banjo, unless of 
   course it's the sound of a chicken caught in a vacuum cleaner. "
Mark Craig Chu-Carroll   (mcc@watson.ibm.com) 
IBM T.J. Watson Research Center  
Received on Friday, 22 June 2001 14:34:40 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 13:57:41 GMT