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

RE: UPDATE responses for versioned collections

From: Clemm, Geoff <gclemm@rational.com>
Date: Tue, 1 Oct 2002 15:08:55 -0400
Message-ID: <E4F2D33B98DF7E4880884B9F0E6FDEE25ED432@SUS-MA1IT01>
To: ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org
Why do we need an errata entry?  The question is whether removing a
binding to a resource is considered a modification to the
resource, or a modification to the collection containing the
binding.  For the purposes of UPDATE, I believe it should be
considered a modification to the collection containing the
binding only.

The "move" (lower case) I was referring to was a multi-resource
update that would result from a labeled update, or a baseline update.
Such a multi-resource update could result in a logical move of
a subtree from one URL to another.

Cheers,
Geoff

-----Original Message-----
From: Julian Reschke [mailto:julian.reschke@greenbytes.de]
Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2002 2:54 PM
To: Clemm, Geoff; ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org
Subject: RE: UPDATE responses for versioned collections


Well,

in this case we would have an erratum for 7.1:

"The response for a successful request MUST be a 207 Multi-Status, where the
DAV:multistatus XML element in the response body identifies all resources
that have been modified by the request."

I also don't understand the second part of your reply -- we're talking about
response marshalling for UPDATE, not MOVE. What am I missing?

Julian
--
<green/>bytes GmbH -- http://www.greenbytes.de -- tel:+492512807760

-----Original Message-----
From: ietf-dav-versioning-request@w3.org
[mailto:ietf-dav-versioning-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Clemm, Geoff
Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2002 8:25 PM
To: ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org
Subject: RE: UPDATE responses for versioned collections


I would expect the latter, i.e. just the fact that the
versioned collection had changed.  The client would then
look at the DAV:version-controlled-binding-set of the
DAV:checked-in version of the collection to see how it
should update its local state (it needs to do that to
differentiate a delete/add from a move).
One benefit of this approach is that it doesn't cause
a flood of responses if you move a folder with 1000
members (i.e. it would return just the source and destination
collections of the move, rather that 1000 added entries
and 1000 deleted entries).
Cheers,
Geoff
Received on Tuesday, 1 October 2002 15:10:12 GMT

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