W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-dist-auth@w3.org > October to December 2004

Re: Comment on UNBIND language in BIND specification

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 17:57:13 +0100
Message-ID: <41A21A69.9010809@gmx.de>
To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org

Julian Reschke wrote:
> 
> Jim Whitehead wrote:
> 
>> Julian,
>>
>>
>>> I expanded the replacement further to:
>>>
>>>    The REBIND method removes a binding to a resource from the collection
>>>    identified by the Request-URI, and adds a binding to that resource
>>>    into another collection.  The request body specifies the segment to
>>>    be removed and the new binding to be created (href element).  It is
>>>    effectively an atomic form of a MOVE request.
>>
>>
>>
>> I like this language, though I suggest the following tweak for the second
>> sentence to fix the fact that we're not removing a segment, we're 
>> removing a
>> binding:
>>
>> The request body specifies the binding to be removed (segment) and the 
>> new
>> binding to be created (href).
> 
> 
> Good catch. I'll make that change.
> 
> Best regards, Julian

OK,

the current edits are at 
<http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/draft-ietf-webdav-bind-latest.html> 
(issues list: 
<http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/draft-ietf-webdav-bind-issues.html>) 
-- www.webdav.org seems to be down right now, so I can't update it.

Again, as far as I can tell, there are no issues left that haven't been 
discussed here on the mailing list before. Note that I assume that if an 
issue is raised and discussed here without any feedback from the 
original poster, I can assume it's resolved.

I therefore plan to submit this version as draft 08 which then should 
get it's working group last call.

Best regards, Julian



-- 
<green/>bytes GmbH -- http://www.greenbytes.de -- tel:+492512807760
Received on Monday, 22 November 2004 16:57:50 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 5 February 2014 07:17:51 UTC