W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-dist-auth@w3.org > January to March 2006

RE: Comments on the "new" 2518--Display Name

From: Kevin Wiggen <kwiggen@xythos.com>
Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2006 15:36:57 -0800
Message-ID: <03E7D3E231BB7B4A915A6581D4296CC60206325F@NSNOVPS00411.nacio.xythos.com>
To: "Julian Reschke" <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Cc: <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>


Well I am not a spec writer nor an English major and I often say Pascal
is my native language BUT:

Webdav servers and clients must understand that the method for
identifying resources is still the URL.  While generic Webdav clients
will be able to display DAV:displayname to end users, both sides of the
Webdav protocol must understand that if users are allowed to do things
like rename, move, copy etc, generic clients must show the URLs to these
end users to allow these operations.  Changes to DAV:displayname do not
issue moves or copies to the server, but simply change a piece of
meta-data on the individual resource.

Language should be added to the spec that makes this clear, as we
routinely hear from people whom have read the spec that expectations
around displayname are not the same as what the spec designers are
telling me on this list.


-----Original Message-----
From: Julian Reschke [mailto:julian.reschke@gmx.de] 
Sent: Friday, March 03, 2006 6:06 AM
To: Kevin Wiggen
Cc: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
Subject: Re: Comments on the "new" 2518--Display Name

Kevin Wiggen wrote:
> 
> Not sure you understood my question.  I would like readers of the spec
> to understand the difference between a URL and Display Name and
> understand how that operates in the real world (MS Webfolders, Apple
> OSX, Xythos).  Webdav clients that make Webdav server look like file
> systems should expect the URL to be used in displays to users and NOT
> display name.  As client developers we often get into conflict on this
> point.  We of course can add a column in windows explorer to SHOW the
> display name, but the URL is the correct item to show users in this
> generic Webdav client.

Well, I wanted to make sure that what you're after is a clarification of

  how WebDAV has been working all the time, not something we changed in 
RFC2518bis.

So yes, I agree that it would be useful to state that the 
DAV:displayname property is not a replacement for the URL, that even in 
presence of nice DAV:displayname there are still good reason to assign 
meaningful URLs, and that clients can not assume that displaynames will 
be unique for the members of a collection.

Do you want to propose specific text?

Best regards, Julian
Received on Friday, 3 March 2006 23:36:59 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:44:13 GMT