W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-dist-auth@w3.org > April to June 1999

RE: Must PROPPATCH operation be atomic...

From: Jim Davis <jdavis@coursenet.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Apr 1999 10:57:32 -0700
Message-Id: <4.1.19990416105338.00a2b7c0@research.coursenet.com>
To: "WebDAV DL'" <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>
At 10:12 AM 4/16/99 -0700, Lisa Lippert (Dusseault) (Exchange) wrote:
>Some PROPPATCH results can fail and others can succeed, so this is why we
>have multi-valued responses.  Clients can easily see what happened.
>Rollback is difficult for servers to implement.  Are there any server
>implementations that do already implement this as atomic or with rollback?
>I'm not aware of any.  I see rollback as a more advanced feature, that we
>can figure out how to do later on.

I am unsure whether I understand your email.  Are you questioning the
requirement that PROPPATCH be atomic?  I do not recall the design rationale
-- perhaps it is in the WebDAV book of Why.  But in any case, one can't
argue against it on the basis of difficulty, since 
the PyDAV server implements PROPPATCH as atomic.

Apologies if I misunderstood you


please reply to jrd3@alum.mit.edu, despite the Reply-To address in the header.
Received on Friday, 16 April 1999 13:53:59 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:01:19 UTC