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

Issue #5: compound DAV:resourcetype property for references.

From: Jim Davis <jdavis@parc.xerox.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 10:03:30 PST
Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19990226100330.0097fba0@mailback.parc.xerox.com>
To: WEBDAV WG <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>
At 03:07 PM 2/22/99 PST, Yaron Goland wrote:

[Yaron sent one large message with many issues, but I think it will help to
address each one in a separate message.  Indeed, all things being equal, I
would request all those who comment to keep to one issue per message,
otherwise the messages get quite lengthy, and the threads become tangled.
but I am very grateful for the comments, and given a choice between one
omnibus message and silence, I must prefer the big one.  thanks YG]

>> > (Issue #5) Section 4.3.1 - ... 
>> > DAV:reftarget, DAV:reftype
>> > and DAV:refintegrity ...  
>> >  values [should be] 
>> > included inside the DAV:reference element in the 
>> > DAV:resourcetype property?

I agree with Yaron, at least for reftype and refintegrity.

An example
<dav:resourcetype>
  <dav:reference>
   <dav:reftype><dav:direct/></dav:reftype>
   <dav:refintegrity/>
  </dav:reference>
</dav:resourcetype>

but as for the reftarget, my intuition says it does not part of the "type".
 if I have two different references, with different targets, but otherwise
the same (both are direct references with no integrity) then they should be
exactly the same "resourcetype".

Judy's rebuttal (that DASL oesn't (yet) support searches on structured
properties) is best answered by saying that that is a problem (perhaps) for
DASL.   The DASL team choose (wisely, I think) to postpone addressing this,
but this is no reason that all of WebDAV must forever be restricted in
design choices.
Received on Friday, 26 February 1999 13:04:14 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:43:49 GMT