I vote for 403 FORBIDDEN with a new DAV:error code. Cheers, Geoff -----Original Message----- From: Julian Reschke [mailto:julian.reschke@gmx.de] > From: Jason Crawford > > > On Tuesday, 10/15/2002 at 07:49 ZE2, "Julian Reschke" wrote: > > 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). > > For example, garbage collecting a file system in the presence of > loops can be relatively expensive. > > I really don't want a new status code, but if we can't find an > appropriate > > existing one, I'm tentatively supportive of Julian's proposal to add one. I think it's clear that there *will* be implementations that do not allow additional bindings on collections (for instance those that are Unix-filesystem based). We don't need a new status code, I was just trying to figure out whether to return 405 (not allowed) or 403 (forbidden) with a well-defined pre-condition (DAV:collection-binds-supported?).Received on Wednesday, 16 October 2002 00:14:44 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:44:02 GMT