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

RE: [ACL] principal-collection-set

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2001 19:02:21 +0200
To: "Clemm, Geoff" <gclemm@rational.com>, "DeltaV \(E-mail\)" <ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org>, <ACL@webdav.org>
Message-ID: <JIEGINCHMLABHJBIGKBCEEJADDAA.julian.reschke@gmx.de>
> From: ietf-dav-versioning-request@w3.org
> [mailto:ietf-dav-versioning-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Clemm, Geoff
> Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2001 6:54 PM
> To: DeltaV (E-mail); ACL@webdav.org
> Subject: RE: [ACL] principal-collection-set
> ...
> These counter-arguments are not so much that I care, but rather to
> reinforce that this decision is pretty much of a wash in either
> direction.
> 1) Keep DeltaV with OPTIONS, and make ACL use OPTIONS for consistency
> 2) Change DeltaV to use properties, and have ACL use properties
> 3) Have DeltaV and ACL use different ways to obtain xxx-collection-set
> The main situation I *really* want to avoid is:
> 4) Change DeltaV to use properties, and have ACL end up using OPTIONS
>    or some other non-property mechanism inconsistent with DeltaV.
> So for those folks that care about this (probably not many :-),
> which choice do you prefer?

Obviously, it MUST be consistent across deltaV, ACL and future WebDAV

I honestly think that 2) is the best solution. For instance, it allows a
client to collect all it needs to know about a resource with one request.
Received on Wednesday, 10 October 2001 13:02:00 UTC

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