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

RE: The Depth header...

From: Clemm, Geoff <gclemm@rational.com>
Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2001 08:49:55 -0400
Message-ID: <3906C56A7BD1F54593344C05BD1374B1042AB906@SUS-MA1IT01>
To: ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org
My impression is that there is more support for having the
default value of the Depth header for a given method to
be the "natural" value for that method, not some global
default (and as you point out below, section 9.2 of 2518
supports that position).  

For the UPDATE method, Tim pointed out that
Depth:0 is the more natural default for the Depth
header since Depth:infinity only makes sense when the label
feature is supported and DAV:label-name is specified in the
request body.  That argument makes sense to me.

(And just for the record, I believe that
making the default Depth value for PROPFIND be Depth:infinity
was a mistake, and that it should be changed to Depth:0
in the next rev of 2518, but that's a thread for a different
mailing list :-).

Cheers,
Geoff


-----Original Message-----
From: Lisa Dusseault [mailto:lisa@xythos.com]
Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 12:56 PM
To: Clemm, Geoff; ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org
Subject: RE: The Depth header...




> -----Original Message-----
> From: ietf-dav-versioning-request@w3.org
> [mailto:ietf-dav-versioning-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Clemm, Geoff
>
>    From: Tim Ellison [mailto:Tim_Ellison@uk.ibm.com]
>
>    I agree that the default should be depth zero.
>
> I agree as well.  I'll make that change unless anyone objects.
>

My objection is that if this is being done for consistency, then the spec
should be consistent with RFC 2518.

From section 8.1: "By default, the PROPFIND method without a Depth header
MUST act as if a "Depth: infinity" header was included. "

Section 8.8.8: "The Depth header is unnecessary as the default behavior of
COPY on a collection is to act as if a "Depth: infinity" header had been
submitted. "

On the other hand, from section 9.2: "Methods which support the Depth header
may choose not to support all of the header's values and may define, on a
case by case basis, the behavior of the method if a Depth header is not
present."

Lisa
Received on Monday, 10 September 2001 08:38:54 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 13:57:42 GMT