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

RE: Feature request for CHECKIN/OUT extension

From: Clemm, Geoff <gclemm@rational.com>
Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2001 13:44:06 -0400
Message-ID: <3906C56A7BD1F54593344C05BD1374B103DED676@SUS-MA1IT01>
To: ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org
Yes, defining the name for the response body for all the methods
would be a good thing, to allow for this kind of extensibility.
Does anyone object?

My convention has been to have the request body for request XXX be
DAV:xxx, and the response body be DAV:xxx-response.


-----Original Message-----
From: Julian F. Reschke [mailto:julian.reschke@greenbytes.de]

Well, I myself don't have the choice to defer it. I'm looking for the best
way to integrate it into our deltaV implementation... Maybe we could at
least consider to define the root element of an optional response body for
CHECKOUT (because that would IMHO be the best way to return additional
information to the client)?

Regards, Julian
Received on Friday, 10 August 2001 13:34:58 UTC

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