W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-dist-auth@w3.org > April to June 2007

Re: RFC 3744: principal-collection-set

From: Cyrus Daboo <cyrus@daboo.name>
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2007 09:40:56 -0400
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
cc: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
Message-ID: <B49164D4CCF46F4749EBEA61@ninevah.local>

Hi Julian,

--On April 27, 2007 8:57:02 AM +0200 Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> 

>> The RCF3253 issues list should have a related entry, pointing out that
>> rfc3253bis should make these live properties as well. Unfortunately,
>> www.webdav.org is down right now (again).
> See
> <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/ietf-dav-versioning/2002JulSep/0003.
> html> and
> <http://www.webdav.org/deltav/protocol/rfc3253-issues-list.htm>, Item

This does beg the question about when it is appropriate to use OPTIONS vs 
properties. Obviously you need to at least have a DAV header in OPTIONS so 
a client knows it is dealing with a DAV server, but beyond that, why have 
anything in OPTIONS when they could be a property? For example, why do we 
need the DASL header in OPTIONS in WebDAV SEARCH? Why can't that be a 
property? Sorry Julian, I had to bring that one up :-)

There has also been some debate in the CalDAV arena about a more general 
server "capabilities" option. Basically some why (via a property) for a 
server to be very specific about what it supports - in particular for any 
SHOULD or MAY features in a spec.

Cyrus Daboo
Received on Friday, 27 April 2007 13:41:16 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:01:36 UTC