W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-dist-auth@w3.org > April to June 2005

Re: WGLC draft-ietf-webdav-bind-11

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Sun, 19 Jun 2005 13:35:11 +0200
Message-ID: <42B5586F.6060309@gmx.de>
To: Cullen Jennings <fluffy@cisco.com>
CC: WebDav <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>, Geoffrey M Clemm <geoffrey.clemm@us.ibm.com>, Jim Whitehead <ejw@soe.ucsc.edu>, ccjason@us.ibm.com

Cullen Jennings wrote:
> 
> I would like to start working group last call on
> 
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-webdav-bind-11.txt
> 
> This WGCL will end on July 4th so please have your comments emailed to this
> list before then.
> 
> Thank you, Cullen

Being one of the authors, it won't surprise anybody that I do not have 
any issues with the current draft.

For the sake of completeness, I'l like to point to one issue where there 
seems to be an unresolved controversy.

The question is: can the BIND spec make any requirements on the 
behaviour of live properties it doesn't define itself?

After long discussion (and important contributions from Roy Fielding who 
stepped in when we went the wrong way), the answer is "no". Furthermore 
it turns out that the problem of describing live property behaviour for 
multiple URIs mapped to the same resource is related to the issue how 
these properties behave under namespace operations (such as MOVE). Thus, 
one could argue, makes it a RFC2518bis issue instead.

I wrote a summary in 
<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-dist-auth/2005AprJun/0001.html> 
(which in turn links to 
<http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/draft-reschke-webdav-namespace-vs-properties-latest.html>). 
If people feel that the spec indeed should say anything at all about 
this topic, they should re-read the discussion now.

Best regards,

Julian
Received on Sunday, 19 June 2005 11:35:27 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:44:08 GMT