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

Re: New "200 OK" status codes, PATCH & PROPFIND

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Tue, 07 Aug 2007 20:47:00 +0200
Message-ID: <46B8BE24.2050601@gmx.de>
To: "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@gbiv.com>
CC: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>

Roy T. Fielding wrote:
> I am really not interested in doing contortions for the sake of
> WebDAV's broken model.  WebDAV is, and always will be, a poor man's
> exception to every rule of HTTP.  That's what the WG insisted on,
> even when I explained why it wouldn't survive the next generation.
> 
> The only reason that such a request is valid is because a PROPPATCH
> is generally intended for a specific representation, so testing the
> If-Match on the body ETag is good enough for what PROPPATCH intends.
> If the WebDAV server chooses to use the same entity-tag for both
> properties and representation, then both the above request and my
> proposal will work fine.  If not, then you should be using the ETag
> returned on the PROPFIND response, not a GET response.

Roy,

the reason why people may do strange things we ETags is IMHO not the 
fault of WebDAV, but the wording of RFC2616. That's why I've been 
pushing for clarifications of "requested variant" and ETag in write 
operations for almost two years now.

Don't shoot the messenger.

Best regards, Julian
Received on Tuesday, 7 August 2007 18:47:37 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 06:50:15 GMT