Re: supported-live-property-set and supported-report-set

Werner Donné wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I looks like the second element declaration of the DTD in section
> 3.1.4 of RFC 3253 is wrong. The content model should have been
> "prop" instead of "name".

Right. I think that's a known bug in the spec; in which case it should 
be on the issues list at <http://www.webdav.org/deltav> (which seems to 
be down right now).

> I also wonder why there are the intermediate elements supported-live-property
> and supported-report (in supported-report-set for the latter).

That's in order to be able to extend the content in some future spec.

Best regards, Julian