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

Re: comment

From: <Tim_Ellison@uk.ibm.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 14:35:19 +0000
To: ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org
Message-ID: <802569DE.00506C5E.00@d06mta07.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com>

I'm familiar with content negotiation, but I guess that negotiating on XML
properties would be 'practically impossible' given that WebDAV properties
match on name alone (and not attributes), otherwise you could image

(assuming xml:lang is the attribute for language tagging, I've no idea what
it is)

PROPPATCH /foo setting properties with language flags
<D:comment xml:lang="useng">Very good</D:comment>
<D:comment xml:lang="frfrench"Tres bon</D:comment>

Then a client could get the property value of choice in the language of

Content-Language: "frfrench"

or even specifying the language in the body of the XML request:

</D:comment xml:lang="useng">
</D:author xml:lang="dutch"

(With big apologies to XML and HTTP syntax-ites.)


Tim Ellison
Java Technology Centre, MP146
IBM UK Laboratory, Hursley Park, Winchester, UK.
tel: +44 (0)1962 819872  internal: 249872  MOBx: 270452

Greg Stein <gstein@lyra.org> on 2001-01-23 10:55:51 PM

Please respond to Greg Stein <gstein@lyra.org>

To:   ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org
Subject:  Re: comment

Apache does this all the time. Based on your Accept-Language request
header, Apache will return different content for a given URL. (assuming
you enable the Multiviews option (on by default) and have mod_negotiation

Granted, it also returns a Location: header specifying the "real" URL.

But negotiation on XML properties seems practically impossible. Personally,
I think that adding DAV:string into the comment is overdone. We don't do
that with our other properties. Why is this one so special? And I seriously
doubt that a comment is going to be entered in multiple languages when the
version is created.
[ a version resource is immutable: you can't come back, translate the
  bugger, and add them into the DAV:comment ]

It seems a gratuitous change to have DAV:string in there.


On Tue, Jan 23, 2001 at 09:25:58AM -0800, Eric Sedlar wrote:
> I've just been looking into how to handle content negotiation, and I
> haven't seen any implementation where content identified by a single
> URL can handle multiple languages without redirection.  In other words,
> if my file has Dutch content, and I'm a French user, I need to be sent
> to another URL with the French version of that content (usually by the
> language extension on the filename).  That other resource would have the
> property values (like DAV:comment) in the correct language, presumably.
> Therefore, I think there is no need to worry about internationalization
> of string properties of a resource--they're going to be localized.  This
> change should be reversed.
> --Eric
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: ietf-dav-versioning-request@w3.org
> > [mailto:ietf-dav-versioning-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of
> > Tim_Ellison@uk.ibm.com
> > Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2001 5:17 AM
> > To: ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org
> > Subject: DAV:comment
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > >   23.1.1 DAV:comment
> > >     Why do we have an extra DAV:string element?
> > >     Why can you have any number of them (how would a client
> > >    choose which one to display)?
> > >
> > > This was a change requested by Yaron to support
> > > internationalization.  You can have the comment
> > > string in multiple languages this way.
> >
> > I'll defer to those who are much more HTTP/XML-versed than I am, but I
> > would imagine that this would be a matter of content negotiation
> > the client and server.
> >
> > Tim
> >
> >
> >

Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
Received on Wednesday, 24 January 2001 09:39:28 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:55:46 UTC