Re: 54th IETF Meeting Information, and RFC2518 open issues

Am Montag den, 22. April 2002, um 18:36, schrieb Lisa Dusseault:

> [...]
>
> To bring our "agenda" up-to-date, here's what I think the largest and
> hardest issues are for RFC2518 bis:
>  - Whether/how to change the If header rules and syntax
>  - Whether/how to change the source property definition
>
> Although the If header has been shown to be interoperable in its 
> simplest
> form with locktokens, it hasn't been shown to be interoperable in 
> its more
> advanced forms or with ETags.  The source property has not had any
> demonstrated interoperability to my knowledge.

If headers with ETags do not add any value to the protocol. For
GET rfc2616 already defines If-Match and friends. Since the ETag
only captures content changes (property changes have undefined
effect on ETags), IF headers for ETag lack a use case.

Having never encountered a client using them, I propose to
drop ETags in IF headers.

The remaining "more advanced" features of IF I can think of are:
- not
- use of URIs with locktokens

URIs with locktokens are in use by us (both server and client).

Does anyone have a use case for "Not"?

//Stefan