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

RE: Links to latest bis working docs

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2002 01:24:05 +0200
To: "Lisa Dusseault" <lisa@xythos.com>, "'Julian Reschke'" <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, "'Clemm, Geoff'" <gclemm@rational.com>, <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>
Message-ID: <JIEGINCHMLABHJBIGKBCKEDDFFAA.julian.reschke@gmx.de>

Lisa,

it probably would be safer just to say that there was a discussion and to
point to the relevant mailig list archive enties.

The problem with the "interoperable solution" is that the "solution"
*itself* is in conflict with the base spec RFC2616 (HTTP), so by definition
it can't be the protocol that an RFC based on HTTP recommends.

Julian

--
<green/>bytes GmbH -- http://www.greenbytes.de -- tel:+492512807760

> -----Original Message-----
> From: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org
> [mailto:w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Lisa Dusseault
> Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 10:37 PM
> To: 'Julian Reschke'; 'Clemm, Geoff'; w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
> Subject: RE: Links to latest bis working docs
>
>
>
> Yes, I have little problem with including more information in the
> *extremely brief* summary of the debate.  It is always difficult to
> summarize a debate, whether briefly or at length.  I had thought that
> that putting the summary in a non-standards-track document would be
> safe.
>
> I still believe that "interoperable" is a fair characterization, however
> I can also add the words "non-compliant".  If we go about qualifying
> implementations based on full compliance, I fear that random software
> bugs would disqualify many many implementations.
>
> lisa
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Julian Reschke [mailto:julian.reschke@gmx.de]
> > Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 1:09 PM
> > To: Lisa Dusseault; 'Clemm, Geoff'; w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
> > Subject: RE: Links to latest bis working docs
> >
> > Lisa,
> >
> > my complaint was that it lists only one of many reasons for rejecting
> yet,
> > but also states that there are interoperable implementations. They may
> > exist, but at least one of them (IIS) does not conform to RFC2616
> (HTTP),
> > so
> > I don't think it qualifies as relevant implementation.
> >
> > Julian
> >
> > --
> > <green/>bytes GmbH -- http://www.greenbytes.de -- tel:+492512807760
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org
> > > [mailto:w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Lisa Dusseault
> > > Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 10:06 PM
> > > To: 'Clemm, Geoff'; w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
> > > Subject: RE: Links to latest bis working docs
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Please note that the "Translate" header does not appear in the
> "revised
> > > [2518] document".
> > >
> > > The "RFC2518 Changes" document discusses issues that have been
> brought
> > > up on the list -- including the proposal that had been made, on the
> > > list, to standardize the Translate header.  This document is only to
> > > help keep track of issues (together with Jason's page) and RFC bis
> > > changes, and is not on any standards track.  Note also that this
> > > document briefly, and I believe correctly, summarizes that the
> working
> > > group rejected the solution.
> > >
> > > If you still have problems with this characterization and where it
> > > appears, please explain.
> > >
> > > Lisa
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org
> > > [mailto:w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org]
> > > > On Behalf Of Clemm, Geoff
> > > > Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 12:26 PM
> > > > To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
> > > > Subject: RE: Links to latest bis working docs
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I agree with Julian.  Since the consensus of the working group
> > > > was to reject the Translate header approach (for the reasons
> > > > Julian mentions, and others), I believe it should not be
> introduced
> > > > in the revised document, and definitely should not be
> characterized as
> > > an
> > > > "interoperable solution".
> > > >
> > > > Cheers,
> > > > Geoff
> > > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Julian Reschke [mailto:julian.reschke@gmx.de]
> > > > Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 2:37 PM
> > > > To: Lisa Dusseault; w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
> > > > Subject: RE: Links to latest bis working docs
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Just two comments on:
> > > >
> > > > 1.1       Source property
> > > > The Source property has not had interoperability demonstrated, but
> > > > messages
> > > > to the list support keeping some way of retrieving the source of
> > > > dynamically-generated Web pages.  An interoperable solution exists
> > > (the
> > > > Microsoft Translate header) but has received rejection on the list
> due
> > > to
> > > > its lack of support for dynamically-generated resources with
> multiple
> > > > source
> > > > files.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > - the Translate header violates RFC2616 which explicitly says that
> > > variant
> > > > handling is *not* supposed to switch between "getting the source"
> and
> > > > "executing a script"
> > > >
> > > > - the actual implementation in IIS breaks RFC2616 in that it
> doesn't
> > > list
> > > > "Translate" as request header on which the GET result varies.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Regards, Julian
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > <green/>bytes GmbH -- http://www.greenbytes.de --
> tel:+492512807760
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org
> > > [mailto:w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org]On
> > > > Behalf Of Lisa Dusseault
> > > > Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 5:07 PM
> > > > To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
> > > > Cc: joels@microsoft.com
> > > > Subject: Links to latest bis working docs
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I promised yesterday I'd put up links to the most recent
> > > work-in-progress.
> > > > http://www.sharemation.com/~milele/public/dav/draft-ietf-webdav-
> > > > rfc2518bis.d
> > > > oc
> > > >
> http://www.sharemation.com/~milele/public/dav/RFC2518%20Changes.doc
> > > > Sometime after the Interop, I'll be doing the real formatted draft
> > > thing
> > > > of
> > > > course.
> > > > Lisa
> > >
>
Received on Tuesday, 10 September 2002 19:24:38 GMT

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