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

Re: new issue: DAV:displayname

From: Jason Crawford <ccjason@us.ibm.com>
Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2003 16:01:20 -0400
To: "Julian Reschke" <nnjulian.reschke___at___gmx.de@smallcue.com>
Cc: "'Webdav WG'" <nnw3c-dist-auth___at___w3c.org@smallcue.com>
Message-ID: <OFD9C425B1.5A1944CA-ON85256D85.006C3B16-85256D85.006DFA83@us.ibm.com>

On Sunday, 08/17/2003 at 01:03 ZE2, "Julian Reschke" 
<nnjulian.reschke___at___gmx.de@smallcue.com> wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> looking at our recent discussion, I feel that we clearly have a problem 
with
> the usage of DAV:displayname.
> 
> The current situation seems to be:
> 
> 1) Some servers implement DAV:displayname as protected live property 
that
> just reflects the last name segment of the request URI (Microsoft IIS)
> 
> 2) Other servers implement DAV:displayname as dead property that by 
default
> is not set until it get's explicitly set by a client (Apache moddav)

I tend to agree with you that among these two choices (2) is superior. But
that seems obvious.  What's more interesting is whether

(3) A server can treat it as a dead property but initialize it to the 
segment
name. 

My impression is that (2) is still a better approach.

Are there issues for mapping this to a file system? 

J.
Received on Sunday, 17 August 2003 16:01:32 GMT

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