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

status of efforts, was: [Moderator Action] WebDAV WG minutes

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2002 09:47:01 +0100
To: "WebDAV" <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>
Message-ID: <JIEGINCHMLABHJBIGKBCCEAIEEAA.julian.reschke@gmx.de>
(I am splitting my comments into separate mails so that we get distinct discussion threads)

> Minutes from WebDAV WG meeting
> March 19, 2002
> 53rd IETF, Minneapolis
> Reported by Larry Masinter, Adobe
> Chair present: Lisa Dusseault, Xythos
> Status of Various Efforts
> -------------------------
> DeltaV: The DeltaV working group is closed, however issues are
> still being discussed actively on the working group mailing list.
> No interop events are planned as yet.
> Q: Any clients for DeltaV? TeamStream (Xythos web file client) is a
> very limited client. Might assume that server vendors have
> clients. SubVersion has a client, but will only work with SubVersion
> for a while.

- I happen to have tested the TeamStream client two days ago (with our server). It's good that there *is* a versioning-aware client, but the current implementation shows that it's not trivial to support the more advanced features. As far as I understand, it currently can *show* a (linear) version history (minus DAV:comment property), but it doesn't really support actions on the version resources (like opening, deleting and so on...)

- Technically, our remote WebDAV adapter *is* a DeltaV client, and it's goal is to interoperate with any RFC3253 server. So far, we haven't found any server to test against except our own (Subversion and Xythos interop fails for various reasons). So I think an interop testing event with a special focus on deltaV would be extremely useful.
> Interop Plans: WebDAV to Draft Standard requires demonstration
> of interoperability of various features between independent
> implementations. First interop was last August, another last fall,
> want to start again this spring.
> Suggestion from Brotsky: schedule rolling, round-robin, server 
> interops, e.g., server-client pair have dates for focus on interop 
> issues. Match servers with clients every month. Some folks were 
> interested.

- I think it would be a good thing to automate as much as possible. Test suites like Litmus are welcome and server developers should have a public test site for their latest code.

> Access control: in last call. Some discussion of special-purpose
> principal search reports. 
> DASL draft: Revived in WebDAV WG rather than defunct DASL WG.  Julian
> Reschke planning 2 separate drafts. The framework draft will cover the
> model and the request/response syntax.

- Clarification: I'm not planning separate drafts. The plan is to issue new drafts as each of the sections becomes stable (framework, basicsearch, QSD...). Right now, the framework (SEARCH method, grammar discovery, error reporting) seems to be stable. The first draft will be submitted as soon the IETF accepts them again.

> A separate mailing list exists for DASL, but some comments are 
> mirrored on the WebDAV mailing list. Search framework issues: 
> character comparison, how to discover what search arbiter to search 
> namespace portion, what are search arbiters? Not special resources. 
> Is any collection a potential search arbiter? Need for "more results" 
> query.
> Issue: there is some overlap of issues between DASL and XML Query. 
> However, XML Query doesn't handle marshalling, for example. 
> Coordination between DASL and XML is needed.
> Query: member of XML Query working group will review DASL.

- That would be welcome. Ideally, DASL would just be about *applying* the basics from XML Query / XSLT to the WebDAV specific case.

> Individual drafts related to WebDAV:
> - tickets (proposal to support tickets for access control by
>   unnamed users)
> - quota (proposal to expose 2 named properties to handle
>   quota on collections: size and quota limit in bytes)
> - property datatypes
>   Proposal to W3C to do XML element datatyping, predated
>   XML schemas

- Clarification: it doesn't predate XML Schema -- it's completely in sync with it:


> - Ordering

- Draft 03 will be submitted next week (unless problems with the draft are reported before):


> Long list of dead drafts & proposals
>   either dead or sleeping
>   - bindings, redirect references, ordered collections,

- We would be interested to revive the BIND protocol / draft.

>    property registration proposal, property namespace and
>    allprop, use of dublin core metadata in dav,
>    additional webdav ...
>    (take from slide)
> comment: since drafts expire after 6 months, these proposals are 
> dead unless
> re-raised.
Received on Thursday, 21 March 2002 03:47:41 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:01:25 UTC