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

RE: New RFC2518bis draft, property values after LOCK of unmapped URL

From: Clemm, Geoff <gclemm@rational.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2002 08:29:20 -0400
Message-ID: <3906C56A7BD1F54593344C05BD1374B1078EB599@SUS-MA1IT01>
To: w3c-dist-auth@w3c.org

I agree with Julian.

Cheers,
Geoff

-----Original Message-----
From: Julian Reschke [mailto:julian.reschke@gmx.de]
Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2002 6:24 PM
To: Lisa Dusseault; Julian Reschke; Jason Crawford; w3c-dist-auth@w3c.org
Subject: RE: New RFC2518bis draft, property values after LOCK of unmapped
URL


Lisa,

I think we should just re-state that the DAV: get* properties reflect the
values of the HTTP entity headers. They may be present or not. If they are
present, they MUST conform to the definitions in RFC2616, in particular,
they MUST NOT be blank.

It doesn't make sense to require PROPFIND to return something different from
GET/HEAD. If the server doesn't know the content language, that's it. Nobody
is served by somebody trying to come up with a "default".

Guess what: the Microsoft Webfolder client PUTs all files with a content
language header of "en_US" - even on a german Windows installation. That's a
bug, not a feature.

Julian
-----Original Message-----
From: Lisa Dusseault [mailto:ldusseault@xythos.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2002 12:05 AM
To: Julian Reschke; Jason Crawford; w3c-dist-auth@w3c.org
Subject: RE: New RFC2518bis draft, property values after LOCK of unmapped
URL


What are other people's views on this? Should live properties for which the
server doesn't have an easy value be left blank or should the property not
exist?

My reasoning was that live properties like "getcontentlanguage" should be
required, thus should exist on every WebDAV resource, even if the value must
be blank. Otherwise a server can completely omit these properties and still
claim compliance.

(Side note: If required live properties like "getcontentlanguage" can be
missing on a WebDAV resource, then we need to clarify under what conditions
they may be missing.  I'm thinking along these lines: "If the latest client
PUT request contains a Content-Language header, the value of this header
MUST be preserved in the getcontentlanguage property value. If the
Content-Language header is never provided, then the server MAY omit this
property, or it MAY calculate a value or choose a reasonable default
value.")

Lisa

-----Original Message-----
From: Julian Reschke [mailto:julian.reschke@gmx.de] 
Sent: Monday, July 22, 2002 1:47 PM
To: Jason Crawford; w3c-dist-auth@w3c.org
Subject: RE: New RFC2518bis draft, property values after LOCK of unmapped
URL

I think the standard WebDAV properties MUST reflect the values of the HTTP
entity headers one would get upon HEAD or GET. So it doesn't make any sense
to require that a value must be present, if it's purely optional in HTTP.

For instance, if a server doesn't have a content-language for a resource, it
MUST NOT report it upon GET (see [1]): "If no Content-Language is specified,
the default is that the content is intended for all language audiences. This
might mean that the sender does not consider it to be specific to any
natural language, or that the sender does not know for which language it is
intended.". So: if you don't have the language, don't report it. A blank
value is an illegal language tag.

[1] http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/rfc2616.html#rfc.section.14.12
-----Original Message-----
From: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org]On
Behalf Of Jason Crawford
Sent: Monday, July 22, 2002 10:04 PM
To: w3c-dist-auth@w3c.org
Subject: RE: New RFC2518bis draft, property values after LOCK of unmapped
URL
<<
Section 4.2: Lock-null resources removed

Text mentions: "SHOULD default to reasonable, or reasonably blank, values
for other properties like getcontentlanguage"

I disagree: unknown properties should be treated as not being present (just
like the relevant HTTP headers), NOT as blank.
>>

If a server creates a resource as a result of a LOCK request on an unmapped
URL, I believe Julian is suggesting that if there is any doubt about what
the property value should be, the property should not be created rather than
set to NULL.

Julian, did I get that right? Would you care to elaborate? What about a few
examples?

------------------------------------------
Phone: 914-784-7569, ccjason@us.ibm.com
Received on Wednesday, 24 July 2002 08:29:55 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:44:01 GMT