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

RE: Reminder: WG Last Call on Ordered Collections

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Wed, 7 May 2003 18:41:00 +0200
To: "Jim Whitehead" <ejw@cse.ucsc.edu>, "'WebDAV'" <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>
Message-ID: <JIEGINCHMLABHJBIGKBCMECOHEAA.julian.reschke@gmx.de>


here's the text I added to resolve this issue:

"Note to implementors: this specification does not mandate a specific
implementation of MOVE operations within the same parent collection.
Therefore, servers may either implement this as a simple rename operation
(preserving the collection member's position), or as a sequence of "remove"
and "add" (causing the semantics of "adding a new member" to apply). Future
revisions of this specification may specify this behaviour more precisely
based on future implementation experience."


Jim, could you please issue the "immediate call for rough consensus"?


<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: Monday, May 05, 2003 6:56 PM
> To: 'WebDAV'
> Subject: RE: Reminder: WG Last Call on Ordered Collections
> > Therefore, my proposal is to leave this specific point undefined.
> > We'd then still need to decide whether the spec should explicitly
> > point out that the behaviour is server-dependant.
> There doesn't appear to be consensus on this issue, hence we
> should leave it
> out of the spec.
> That said, given that we had discussion on this issue, it makes
> sense to try
> and capture some of that discussion in the specification, so that
> implementors aren't operating in a total vacuum on this issue. Minimally,
> the spec. should note that this behavior is intentionally undefined.
> - Jim
Received on Wednesday, 7 May 2003 14:03:26 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:01:27 UTC