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

RE: Bindings and Redirect Ref. teleconf. Mar. 1, 2000

From: Slein, Judith A <JSlein@crt.xerox.com>
Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2000 09:51:03 -0500
Message-ID: <8E3CFBC709A8D21191A400805F15E0DB0211F984@crte147.wc.eso.mc.xerox.com>
To: "'Joe Orton'" <joe@orton.demon.co.uk>, WebDAV WG <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>
It's certainly a possibility.

The only problem I can see with relying on MKREF is that it would not just
update the target, but would replace the resource with a new resource.
That's probably harmless if it's an HTTP resource with no properties, but if
it is a WebDAV resource it might have properties that you would like to
preserve while updating its target.

--Judy

-----Original Message-----
From: Joe Orton [mailto:joe@orton.demon.co.uk]
Sent: Wednesday, March 01, 2000 7:05 PM
To: WebDAV WG
Subject: Re: Bindings and Redirect Ref. teleconf. Mar. 1, 2000


> Issue #6: Need to add rationale for why we use relative URLs. Server is
> required to store it as a relative URL.  Server MUST NOT change the
relative
> URL during a MOVE.
> 
> Raises the issue of needing separate methods for getting the value of a
> reference, and modifying the value of a reference.  Tentatively agreed on
> REFGET, REFSET (but noone likes these too much).

The original -00 spec allowed MKREF with Overwrite, could this be used
instead of REFSET?

joe
Received on Friday, 3 March 2000 09:51:49 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:43:54 GMT