Re: Collections and Request-URIs

Am Dienstag den, 18. Juni 2002, um 18:06, schrieb Dan Brotsky:

>
> On Tuesday, June 18, 2002, at 04:49 AM, Clemm, Geoff wrote:
>> I agree with Julian (i.e. that trailing slashes are allowed by
>> the syntax), but I also have argued vigorously that the RFC-2518
>> "guidance" is incorrect, and the next revision of RFC-2518 should
>> simply state "a URI with a trailing slash SHOULD identify the
>> same resource as the URI with the trailing slash removed".
>
> But do you also want this to be the case for non-collection 
> resources?  Perhaps you mean "if a URI that ends in a trailing 
> slash identifies a DAV-compliant collection resource, then the 
> same URI with the trailing slash removed SHOULD identify the same 
> resource."  I would actually go for MUST in that case, although 
> such a change would break some existing servers.
>
>     dan

I think the current approach in RFC 2518 works just fine, e.g.
to indicate in the Content-Location that this entity is really
located somewhere else.

It worked until Apache 2.0 and I do not see any benefit
in the new 301 for PROPFIND behaviour. Lack of deep insight
on my part most likely.

But even if /a and /a/ is the same from WebDAV point of view,
there are a lot of common use cases where GET on /a/b will
return 301/302 to /a/b/ no matter what WebDAV has to say about it.
The good old index.html trick...

//Stefan