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

RE: RFC2518 ambiguity on creationdate/lastmodifieddate

From: Clemm, Geoff <gclemm@rational.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2002 12:54:56 -0500
Message-ID: <3906C56A7BD1F54593344C05BD1374B103F8AF7E@SUS-MA1IT01>
To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
2518 is at best ambiguous, and a worst, contradictory on this topic.

I would vote for (a) property not found.

(b) is a possible interpretation, but an empty value
violates the DTD for this property.
The comment about "mandatory properties" in section 7.4 is not
very useful, because "mandatory properties" is never defined in 2518.

(c) violates the requirement in 8.1 that missing
property errors be reported

(d) is just obviously wrong (:-).

Cheers,
Geoff


-----Original Message-----
From: Jason Crawford [mailto:ccjason@us.ibm.com]
Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2002 12:02 PM
To: Julian Reschke; w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
Subject: RE: RFC2518 ambiguity on creationdate/lastmodifieddate



Hey everyone...

The following posting about four months ago was not answered.   Do we have
an answer?   Is this a general problem for properties?  Let's hear what you
think...

BTW... I'd like to mention, but not necessarily recommend an option.  See
(d) below.

>
> Hi,
>
> if for some reason a server doesn't have one of these timestamps for a
> resource, what should it report on PROPFIND for these properties?
>
> a) Property not found (HTTP 404),
>
> b) Empty property (this seem to be backed by the wording in section 7.4
> [1],
> but is reported as error by Adobe GoLive,
>
> c) Property silently suppressed (not reported at all) -- this
> seems to work
> with GoLive.

 d) Return a fixed but not correctly supported value.  For example, always
    respond with 1/1/1990.

>
> In addition, how should the server behaviour upon a PROPFIND/propname on
> this resource?
>
> Julian
>

------------------------------------------
Phone: 914-784-7569,   ccjason@us.ibm.com
Received on Thursday, 7 February 2002 12:55:31 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:43:59 GMT