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

Re: [Bug 3] Bindings draft should specify if all properties MUST have same value on all bindings

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004 23:20:11 +0100
Message-ID: <41B4DB1B.7020605@gmx.de>
To: Lisa Dusseault <lisa@osafoundation.org>
CC: Webdav WG <w3c-dist-auth@w3c.org>

Lisa Dusseault wrote:
>> If it doesn't matter, why does RFC2518 say:
>>
>> "Although implicit in [RFC2068] and [RFC2396], any resource, including 
>> collection resources, MAY be identified by more than one URI. For 
>> example, a resource could be identified by multiple HTTP URLs."
>>
>> (<http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/rfc2518.html#rfc.section.5.1.p.4>) and
>>
>> "A resource may be made available through more than one URI. However 
>> locks apply to resources, not URIs. Therefore a LOCK request on a 
>> resource MUST NOT succeed if can not be honored by all the URIs 
>> through which the resource is addressable."
>>
> 
> In this case it *does* matter to clients because it is detectable -- the 
> behavior has concrete results, even if the client can't detect that 
> there are multiple bindings.  If a client is trying to allow the user to 

It's always detectable. For instance, if I submit a depth:0 LOCK request 
to "/a", and a subsequent PROPFIND on the DAV:lockdiscovery property of 
"/b" shows that it is locked by the same lock I just created on "/a", I 
can conclude that both are the same resource.

BIND makes it *easier* to detect sameness, but it doesn't introduce any 
new concept.

> ...

Best regards, Julian


-- 
<green/>bytes GmbH -- http://www.greenbytes.de -- tel:+492512807760
Received on Monday, 6 December 2004 22:20:49 UTC

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