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

FW: response to comment ...

From: Lisa Dusseault <lisa@xythos.com>
Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2003 18:38:50 -0800
To: "Webdav WG" <w3c-dist-auth@w3c.org>
Message-ID: <069201c2e2c0$5afa0c50$f8cb90c6@xythoslap>



> From: "Julian Reschke" <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
> Date: Tue Mar 4, 2003  1:17:18  PM US/Pacific
> Subject: RE: bind draft issues
[snip]
> Yes. Clearly they aren't. RFC2518 never talked about "URL properties".
> DAV:displayname is a property of the resource, and therefore it must
be
> independant of the URL through which the property is accessed.
>
> BTW: I'm not aware of implementations that actually support multiple
> bindings and show this behaviour.

Here's an example.  WFS used to support bindings, but we pulled them out
because they were hard to maintain and nobody was using them, and the
standard wasn't going anywhere at the time. 

Now, as then, WFS sets the display name to be the base name from the
path part of the URL.  So for us resourcename is a property which is
constant as long as the resource's URL is constant, and changes when the
URL changes.  I don't know if we'd change this if we did support
bindings.

I have some vague memory that some Microsoft WebDAV client expects the
resourcename to change to be equivalent to the last path segment of the
URL, and that client behaves badly if that's not true.  However, I'm
afraid I can't substantiate this as I've forgotten all the details.
Does that ring a bell for anybody else?

Lisa
Received on Tuesday, 4 March 2003 21:38:56 GMT

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