- From: Lisa Dusseault <lisa@xythos.com>
- Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2001 10:53:15 -0700
- To: "Clemm, Geoff" <gclemm@rational.com>, "DeltaV" <ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org>
Shouldn't that be the <D:prop> element -- already used in PROPFIND response and PROPPATCH request bodies -- rather than the <D:name> element? lisa > -----Original Message----- > From: ietf-dav-versioning-request@w3.org > [mailto:ietf-dav-versioning-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Clemm, Geoff > Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2001 1:50 PM > To: DeltaV > Subject: RE: Use of attributes > > > > From: Julian F. Reschke [mailto:julian.reschke@greenbytes.de] > > > From: Clemm, Geoff > > > > Probably, the best way to go is to replace the old syntax, i.e.: > > > > <D:supported-live-property-set> > > <D:supported-live-property> > > <D:name> <D:getcontentlanguage/> </D:name> > > </D:supported-live-property> > > <D:supported-live-property> > > <D:name> <X:quota/> </D:name> > > </supported-live-property-set> > > Why do we need <D:name>? Wouldn't > > <D:supported-live-property-set> > <D:supported-live-property> > <D:getcontentlanguage/> > </D:supported-live-property> > <D:supported-live-property> > <X:quota/> > </D:supported-live-property> > </D:supported-live-property-set> > > This would make it unsafe to define extensions to the > D:supported-live-property content, because you would risk > colliding with the name of a live property. The D:name > intermediate node ensures that there is no such collision. > > Cheers, > Geoff
Received on Tuesday, 14 August 2001 13:53:51 UTC