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

Re: Missing <status> elements from examples in the DeltaV specificati on

From: Tim Ellison <Tim_Ellison@uk.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 10:49:59 +0000
To: Peter Raymond <Peter.Raymond@merant.com>
Cc: ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org, ietf-dav-versioning-request@w3.org, w3c-dist-auth@w3c.org
Message-ID: <OF60C9353F.CC7F2826-ON80256B4B.003B4709@portsmouth.uk.ibm.com>
The examples should be updated.
There is no good reason to depart from that DTD.

Regards,

Tim Ellison
Java Technology Centre, MP146
IBM UK Laboratory, Hursley Park, Winchester, UK. SO21 2JN
tel: +44 (0)1962 819872  internal: 249872  MOBx: 270452




Peter Raymond <Peter.Raymond@merant.com>
Sent by: ietf-dav-versioning-request@w3.org
2002-01-24 09:59

 
        To:     ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org
        cc:     w3c-dist-auth@w3c.org
        Subject:        Missing <status> elements from examples in the DeltaV specificati       on

 

Hi, 
Section 12.9.1 of RFC2518 gives a DTD for the response element of 
multistatus: 
<!ELEMENT response (href, ((href*, status)|(propstat+)), 
responsedescription?) > 
But in the examples in section 7.1.1 and 11.2.1 in the deltav 
specification 
we have multistatus responses with <href> elements but no <status> or 
<propstat> 
elements.  These are invalid given the above DTD. 
So, are the examples missing <status> elements or is the DTD wrong and 
should we 
allow responses without status and assume 200 OK? 
Regards, 
-- 
Peter Raymond - MERANT 
Principal Architect (PVCS) 
Tel: +44 (0)1727 813362 
Fax: +44 (0)1727 869804 
mailto:Peter.Raymond@merant.com 
WWW: http://www.merant.com 
Received on Thursday, 24 January 2002 06:01:32 GMT

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