RE: Should I use displayname?

• From: Jim Whitehead <ejw@ics.uci.edu>
• Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2000 09:49:46 -0800
• To: ccjason@us.ibm.com, Rickard Falk <rickard.falk@excosoft.se>
• Cc: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
• Message-ID: <NDBBIKLAGLCOPGKGADOJAEICCMAA.ejw@ics.uci.edu>

Jason writes:
> 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.

Hmm, since properties are part of the state of the resource, in the presence
of bindings it is more than possible for there to be multiple URI names for
the same "display name".  This removes the value of the displayname
property.  Some solutions:

1) move displayname to the collection, and have the collection maintain
displayname/binding pairs (this solution seems icky to me)

2) deprecate displayname, and only use URIs for display to the user, and
concentrate on i18n support for URIs.

- Jim

Received on Friday, 21 January 2000 12:53:51 UTC