RE: redirect references protocol: MKRESOURCE issue

That does seem simpler to me, if we *do* in fact need both 301-style and 
302-style.  I recall the explanation that HTTP supports both, but that
doesn't
prove that WebDAV needs to create both.  Are both equally prevalent on the
Web?

lisa


> -----Original Message-----
> From: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org 
> [mailto:w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Geoffrey M Clemm
> Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2004 3:14 PM
> To: webdav
> Subject: Re: redirect references protocol: MKRESOURCE issue
> 
> 
> 
> I would suggest that we resolve these issues as follows:
> 
> - allow PROPPATCH to update the DAV:reftarget property
> 
> - have an additional property that specifies the status that
> will be returned, e.g. DAV:redirectref-status
> that has an integer value of either 301 or 302.
> 
> Cheers,
> Geoff 
> 
> Julian on 01/05/2004 07:40:42 AM:
> 
> > 
> > Hi,
> > 
> > there was an outstanding issue to replace MKRESOURCE by a 
> less generic 
> > method that only creates redirects and does not overlap 
> with PROPPATCH.
> > 
> > This was added in the current edits at 
> > <http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/draft-ietf-webdav-redirectref-
> > protocol-latest.html#METHOD_MKREDIRECTREF>.
> > 
> > The following issues remain:
> > 
> > - missing ability to update the target without having to delete and 
> > re-create the redirect resource (proposal: just add 
> UPDATEREDIRECTREF)
> > 
> > - missing ability to create specific redirect types (such as those 
> > generating a 301 rather than a 302)
> > 
> > 
> > Regards, Julian
> > 
> > 
> > -- 
> > <green/>bytes GmbH -- http://www.greenbytes.de -- tel:+492512807760
> > 
> 
>

Received on Wednesday, 7 January 2004 18:18:50 UTC