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

RE: BIND response codes

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2002 19:49:43 +0200
To: "Jim Whitehead" <ejw@cse.ucsc.edu>, "'Webdav WG'" <w3c-dist-auth@w3c.org>
Message-ID: <JIEGINCHMLABHJBIGKBCCEGDFJAA.julian.reschke@gmx.de>

For the same reason a Unix file system by default behaves this way.

Hard links to collections are dangerous (loops) and in most cases required
(symlinks aka redirect refs to collections in most cases are all that's
required).

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 Jim Whitehead
> Sent: Tuesday, October 15, 2002 7:40 PM
> To: 'Webdav WG'
> Subject: RE: BIND response codes
>
>
>
> I don't understand why a server would want to do one, but not the other.
>
> - Jim
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org
> > [mailto:w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Julian Reschke
> > Sent: Tuesday, October 15, 2002 5:39 AM
> > To: 'Webdav WG'
> > Subject: BIND response codes
> >
> >
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > would it possibly make sense to define the BIND response for the
> > case where
> > the client attempts to create a new binding to a collection, but
> > the server
> > only supports bindings to non-collections?
> >
> > --
> > <green/>bytes GmbH -- http://www.greenbytes.de -- tel:+492512807760
>
Received on Tuesday, 15 October 2002 13:50:17 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:44:02 GMT