- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 20:58:36 +0100
- To: ejw@cs.ucsc.edu
- CC: "'WebDAV (WebDAV WG)'" <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>
Jim Whitehead wrote: > Julian writes: > > >>3.2.1 Example for DAV:parent-set property > > > *snip* > > >> <parent-set xmlns="DAV:"> >> <parent> >> <href>/CollX</href> >> <segment>x.gif</segment> >> </parent> >> <parent> >> <href>/CollX</href> >> <segment>y.gif</segment> >> </parent> >> </parent-set> > > > Seems to me the href should hold a fully qualified URL, since other hrefs in > the specification do this as well. It may hold whatever RFC2518 defines for DAV:href (we probably should let the DTD fragment refer to RFC2518, section 12.3, right?). RFC2518 relies on RFC2068, section 3.2.1, which allows both absoluteURI and relativeURI. > PS -- While we're on the subject, I'll hold this up as an example of the > kind of interpretation difference reasonable implementers can make of > language that seems perfectly clear (and this is *much* more simple than the > syntax for If headers). I don't see the issue here. Lots of WebDAV servers return relativeURIs in DAV:href elements, and as far as I can tell, this is no problem at all. Please explain :-) Best regards, Julian -- <green/>bytes GmbH -- http://www.greenbytes.de -- tel:+492512807760
Received on Wednesday, 1 December 2004 19:59:19 UTC