W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > April to June 2007

Re: PATCH and WebDAV, was Re: PATCH Draft

From: Cyrus Daboo <cyrus@daboo.name>
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 13:38:26 -0400
To: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
cc: ietf-http-wg@w3.org, Lisa Dusseault <lisa@osafoundation.org>
Message-ID: <A471FD592D8A8FFA763DE6B2@caldav.corp.apple.com>

Hi James,

--On June 26, 2007 10:23:58 AM -0700 James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> 

> I can understand why this would be desirable. I, however, am nowhere
> near qualified to discuss any reasonable considerations for WebDAV.

Right, but your co-author is :-)

> Regarding the "DAV:supported-patch-formats" suggestion, why wouldn't the
> Accept-Patch response header be enough?

Typically WebDAV clients tend to prefer to get resource-specific 
information via PROPFIND (properties) rather than OPTIONS (response 
headers) - ETag is a good example of that: there is an ETag response header 
and a getetag WebDAV property. The cost of exposing patch format 
information as a WebDAV property is minimal and the benefits are several, 
including the fact that a client can do a Depth:1 PROPFIND to get all 
properties of all resources in a collection all in one go without having to 
do OPTIONS on each one separately.

Cyrus Daboo
Received on Tuesday, 26 June 2007 17:39:24 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 11:10:42 UTC