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

RE: Label header vs PROPFIND depth 1

From: Clemm, Geoff <gclemm@rational.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2002 14:02:02 -0400
Message-ID: <3906C56A7BD1F54593344C05BD1374B103F8B129@SUS-MA1IT01>
To: "'Deltav WG'" <ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org>
   From: Lisa Dusseault [mailto:ldusseault@xythos.com]

   Geoff said:
   >    PROPFIND /a
   >    Depth: 1
   >    Label: labeltest
   > Assuming /a is not version-controlled, then the effect of the Label
   > header is undefined, so your implementation could just ignore the
   > Label header and return the properties of /a, or it could indicate
   > that it is an error for /a.
   >
   > Since /a/b is version-controlled, the effect is defined by section
   > 8.6, and you would return the properties of the version labeled
   > "labeltest".

   This is interesting -- I thought that the RFC said that the label
   header must be ignored if the resource is not version-controlled.
   Thus, it would be *wrong* to return an error for /a.

Lisa is of course correct.  Section 8.3 covers this case.
So yes, it must be ignored for a non-version-controlled resource,
so it would be wrong to return an error for /a.

Boy, nothing like a little jet lag to short-circuit the ol' brain cells
(:-).

   I don't see any definition of what should happen, BTW, if the "labeltest"
   label does not exist on /a/b -- however the resource is
version-controlled.
   Is that an error?   How is the client supposed to be able to tell the
   difference between a version-controlled resource for which the label
exists,
   and a version-controlled resource for which the label doesn't exist?

See section 8.6, the DAV:must-select-version-in-history precondition.
It is an error if you request a label that does not exist on a given VCR.

Cheers,
Geoff
Received on Monday, 22 April 2002 14:02:37 GMT

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