W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-dist-auth@w3.org > January to March 2000

Re: Should I use displayname?

From: Greg Stein <gstein@lyra.org>
Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2000 15:07:03 -0800 (PST)
To: Rickard Falk <rickard.falk@excosoft.se>
cc: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10001191503470.13911-100000@nebula.lyra.org>
On Wed, 19 Jan 2000 ccjason@us.ibm.com wrote:
>...
> I don't think you can count on it containing anything and even that it
> exists.  If it does exist, it does seem like the thing you'd want to
> display.
> 
> Note: I don't think it's even technically required to correspond to
> the URI at all.
> 
> Note: in the presence of multiple bindings, if the server initializes it
> to the URI and treats it as a dead property, that URI might be different
> from the URI from which it was accessed.  This unexpected behavior is even
> possible (but less likely) if the value is only initialized to the last
> segment of the URI.
> 
> That's only the technical answer.  If you were asking for a consensus
> answer, you can add DAV4J to the list.  It currently treats it as a dead
> property that gets initialized to the full URI.  It also allows the client
> to change the displayname to anything they wish.

As another point of reference:

mod_dav treats it as a dead property and does *not* initialize the value
to anything. In other words, it (typically) does not exist on a resource.
If it does, then it only contains whatever somebody happened to shove into
it -- that could be a JPEG image for all mod_dav cares.

Cheers,
-g

-- 
Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
Received on Wednesday, 19 January 2000 18:03:00 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:43:53 GMT