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

RE: new issue: DAV:displayname

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Fri, 5 Sep 2003 12:54:50 +0200
To: "Horst Liermann" <horst.liermann@ixos.de>, "'Julian Reschke'" <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, "'Webdav WG'" <w3c-dist-auth@w3c.org>
Message-ID: <JIEGINCHMLABHJBIGKBCEEPBIFAA.julian.reschke@gmx.de>

Here's some more info on DAV:displayname vs Microsoft clients:

There are at least two different types of webfolder clients: those shipping
with W2K and O2K (DLL version 8.*) completely ignore DAV:displayname. Those
shipping with Windows XP, Office XP and Sharepoint do "support"
DAV:displayname, but have multiple bugs in doing so:

<http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/webfolder-client-list.html#issue-displayed
-href>:

"The URI displayed in the "internet adress" column is constructed from the
base URI of the collection and the resource's DAV:displayname property (when
present). This is wrong - the column should display the DAV:href returned in
the PROPFIND response body."

<http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/webfolder-client-list.html#issue-displayna
me-1>

"The Webfolder client displays the DAV:displayname only if it doesn't
contain some characters that happen to be reserved in filenames (such as
"/"). However, the displayname is just a textual description, so it should
be displayable no matter what kind of text it contains (basically this is
caused by the Webfolder mistaking the displayname to be some kind of
replacement resource name)."

<http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/webfolder-client-list.html#issue-displayna
me-2>

"If the client decides to use the DAV:displayname instead of the last path
segment for display, it seems to internally confuse both. A rename operation
on a resource where the displayname and the last path segment differ fails
because the client submits the MOVE request to a broken request URI
(collection href and displayname concatenated)."

If you are aware of more issues, please report them (so I'll can put them
into the issues list). Also it would be nice to get some feedback about
which issue appears in which client (obviously I can't test them all :-)

Regards, Julian


--
<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 Horst Liermann
> Sent: Monday, August 18, 2003 3:53 PM
> To: 'Julian Reschke'; 'Webdav WG'
> Subject: RE: new issue: DAV:displayname
>
>
>
> Hi,
>
> I have installed "MS Sharepoint" and I tested the behavior of Sharepoint.
> Sharepoint is a basic WebDAV implementation. They have something like
> versioning, but it's not DeltaV.
>
> As far as I understand MS-Sharepoint, the behavior is:
>
> 	There is a URL "segment name" for the name of the resource.
> 	There is a DAV:displayname for the "title" of the resource.
>
> DAV:displayname normaly is not the same as the "segment name". So
> DAV:displayname is a "dead" property
> It's also possible NOT setting the property DAV:displayname.
>
> Behavior is like 2).
>
>
> Horst
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Julian Reschke [mailto:julian.reschke@gmx.de]
> Sent: Sunday, August 17, 2003 1:03 PM
> To: 'Webdav WG'
> Subject: new issue: DAV:displayname
>
>
>
> 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)
>
>
> We are currently discussing whether 1) is ok. My position is that it's
> clearly not, as
>
> - the value of the last path segment is not "a description of the resource
> that is suitable for presentation to a user",
>
> - replicating something that's already available from the <href>
> element of
> the PROPFIND response into a property just has no benefit at all,
>
> - clients demonstratibly can cope with absent DAV:displayname values (as
> they all interoperate with Apache moddav today) and finally
>
> - the concept of a property that varies with the request URI is deeply
> incompatible with the concept of multiple bindings to resources.
>
>
> So my preference would be just to state that DAV:displayname SHOULD NOT be
> used to replicate the information from the last path segment.
>
> Another alternative would be to *deprecate* DAV:displayname and
> to define a
> new property with more precisely defined semantics, such as
> DAV:description.
>
>
> Note that this in fact *is* a interoperability issues, as we are getting
> lots of complaints from users not being able to set display names on some
> remote WebDAV servers mounted into the SAP Enterprise Portal.
>
>
> Julian
>
> --
> <green/>bytes GmbH -- http://www.greenbytes.de -- tel:+492512807760
>
Received on Friday, 5 September 2003 06:55:01 GMT

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