W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-dist-auth@w3.org > April to June 2003

RE: More on ordered collections

From: Clemm, Geoff <gclemm@rational.com>
Date: Mon, 7 Apr 2003 18:19:06 -0400
Message-ID: <E4F2D33B98DF7E4880884B9F0E6FDEE25ED75E@SUS-MA1IT01>
To: "'Webdav WG'" <w3c-dist-auth@w3c.org>

One thing that I would suggest is to never try to define semantics for
both COPY and MOVE at the same time (they have radically different
semantics, in spite of what 2518 incorrectly implies, as acknowledged
by the authors of 2518 :-).  In particular, in the following
discussion, what Lisa says is true for COPY while what Julian says is
true for MOVE.  In particular:

   > > From: Julian Reschke [mailto:julian.reschke@gmx.de]
   > >
   > > If I MOVE or COPY a resource into a collection, overwriting
   > > a resource that has an ordering position, is that ordering
   > > position (of the destination) preserved?  Usually not, as
   > > RFC2518 defines an Overwrite to be implicitly DELETE the
   > > target.

I believe that we have consensus that 2518 is wrong here 
(this is explicitly pointed out in 3253) and that Overwrite is
only a DELETE for MOVE, not for COPY.

   > From: Lisa Dusseault
   >
   > No, I disagree with this.  Overwriting a regular resource does
   > not reset all the live properties.  For example, it would be
   > pretty disastrous for the ACL property to be reset every time a
   > resource is overwritten.

Here Lisa is talking about COPY behavior.

   From: Julian Reschke [mailto:julian.reschke@gmx.de]

   If you do that using a MOVE? I *really strongly* disagree. ACLs are
   properties of a resource, not of it's binding/URL. MOVEing a
   resource MUST move it's ACL with it, overwriting the target
   resource's ACLs.

And here Julian is responding with MOVE behavior.

Cheers,
Geoff
Received on Monday, 7 April 2003 18:19:15 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:44:04 GMT