W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-dist-auth@w3.org > April to June 2002

Re: need clarification about COPY to locked resource response cod e

From: Stefan Eissing <stefan.eissing@greenbytes.de>
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2002 10:05:43 +0200
To: WebDAV <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>
Message-Id: <BE1F0AFE-55C7-11D6-9959-00039384827E@greenbytes.de>

Am Montag den, 22. April 2002, um 02:40, schrieb Clemm, Geoff:

>    From: Julian Reschke [mailto:julian.reschke@gmx.de]
>
[...]
>    - MAY contain response elements for targets that caused the failure.
>
> That would be OK with me but I'd prefer to nest the information
> about targets that caused the failure in the response element for the
> source resource that wasn't moved/copied/deleted.  This is a change
> from RFC 2518, but I think it is warranted.
>
>    It might be woth thinking to also add some kind of linkage 
> between the
> two
>    response elements.
>
> I agree.  That is the purpose for nesting the information about the
> targets that caused the failure in the response for the target that
> was not copied.

So, as usual I propose a format which will make everyone scream and
come up with a much better one.

...
<D:response>
   <D:href>/bla/...</D:href>
   <D:status>HTTP/1.1 409 CONFLICT</D:status>
   <D:cause>
     <D:href>/other/...</D:href>
     <D:status>HTTP/1.1 423 LOCKED</D:status>
   </D:cause>
</D:response>

//Stefan
Received on Monday, 22 April 2002 04:06:25 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:44:00 GMT