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

Re: another thought on "is element order significant" vs DTDs in WebDAV

From: Elias Sinderson <elias@cse.ucsc.edu>
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2003 10:57:07 -0700
Message-ID: <3F37D8F3.1060907@cse.ucsc.edu>
To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
+1, being less strict unless otherwise noted is the best approach.

Elias


Lisa Dusseault wrote:

>I just noticed that the specification for PROPPATCH says that property
>changes MUST be applied in order.  So clearly there are already some cases
>in WebDAV in which XML order of elements is significant.  
>
>I still think it's a good idea to say at a minimum that the order of
>resources and properties in a PROPFIND response is irrelevant.  So should we
>say that in general order is irrelevant but the PROPPATCH request body is an
>exception?  Or should we say that in general order is important but the
>PROPFIND response body is an exception?
>
>I favour the first - the general rule being that order is irrelevant unless
>specified as relevant. 
>
>Lisa
>
>  
>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org 
>>[mailto:w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Lisa Dusseault
>>Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2003 9:45 AM
>>To: 'Julian Reschke'; w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
>>Subject: RE: another thought on "is element order 
>>significant" vs DTDs in WebDAV
>>
>>
>>
>>I agree.  I'll add a further reason, which is that it's more 
>>important for servers, which handle 1000s of clients, to be 
>>able to stream data out in the order most quickly obtainable, 
>>to maximize server performance.
>>
>>Lisa
>>
>>    
>>
>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>From: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org
>>>[mailto:w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Julian Reschke
>>>Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2003 6:04 AM
>>>To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
>>>Subject: another thought on "is element order significant" vs 
>>>DTDs in WebDAV
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Hi,
>>>
>>>here are a few reasons why I think WebDAV should say that
>>>element ordering is irrelevant:
>>>
>>>1) There are already existing well-deployed servers (in this
>>>case IIS) that get the ordering wrong (here: propstat 
>>>content), thus clients can't rely on ordering anyway for all 
>>>practical purposes,
>>>
>>>2) Requiring a specific ordering will make protocol
>>>extensions extremely hard. For instance, take two independant 
>>>extensions "A" and "B" that extend RFC2518 and add new 
>>>elements to the same container element. If at a later point a 
>>>new protocol revision  tries to integrate both extensions, it 
>>>will be hard to come up with a simple DTD that consolidates 
>>>both changes.
>>>
>>>Julian
>>>
>>>--
>>><green/>bytes GmbH -- http://www.greenbytes.de -- tel:+492512807760
>>>
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>
>>
>>    
>>
>
>
>  
>
Received on Monday, 11 August 2003 13:57:14 GMT

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