W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org > April to June 2002

RE: Missing preconditions for COPY and MOVE ?

From: Clemm, Geoff <gclemm@rational.com>
Date: Sat, 6 Apr 2002 00:22:14 -0500
Message-ID: <3906C56A7BD1F54593344C05BD1374B1066908C3@SUS-MA1IT01>
To: "'ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org'" <ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org>
   From: Nevermann, Dr., Peter [mailto:Peter.Nevermann@softwareag.com]

   What happens if the destination header of a COPY or MOVE (with
   overwrite) identifies a resource with a DAV:checked-in property or
   a version resource?

   Are not preconditions like DAV:cannot-modify-version-controlled-content
and
   DAV:cannot-modify-version (see: 3.10) missing in 3.14 and 3.15?

These are four different questions:

COPY/overwrite to a DAV:checked-in VCR is just like a PUT to a
DAV:checked-in VCR.  It will succeed if DAV:auto-version is set
appropriately, and fail otherwise (see Section 3.14)

For a MOVE/overwrite to a DAV:checked-in VCR, the fact that it
is a DAV:checked-in VCR is irrelevant ... what matters is whether
the collection containing it allows you to remove and add members.
If that collection is version-controlled, then section 14.7 applies.

COPY/overwrite to a version always fails.  This is stated in the
definition of a "version resource" in section 1.3:
  "The content and dead properties of a version never change."
I agree that it would have been reasonable to have a
DAV:cannot-modify-version precondition on COPY for this case.

MOVE/overwrite to a version always fails.  This is stated in the
definition of a "version resource" in section 1.3:
 "The server allocates a distinct new URL for each new version, and
 this URL will never be used to identify any resource other than that
 version."
I agree that it would have been reasonable to have a
DAV:cannot-modify-version precondition on MOVE for this case.

Cheers,
Geoff
Received on Saturday, 6 April 2002 00:22:46 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 13:57:43 GMT