- From: Manfred Baedke <manfred.baedke@greenbytes.de>
- Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2011 13:19:30 +0100
- To: Javier Godoy <rjgodoy@fich.unl.edu.ar>
- CC: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, Werner Baumann <werner.baumann@onlinehome.de>, w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
On 21.12.11 12:14, Javier Godoy wrote: > On 2011-12-18 18:58, Julian Reschke wrote: > >> On 2011-12-18 22:11, Werner Baumann wrote: >> > Copy with Depth: 0 is one of the fancy ideas of RFC 4918 that was >> never >> > seriously defined, just as Collection is mostly undefined. >> >> The spec says: >> >> "A COPY of "Depth: 0" only instructs that the collection and its >> properties, but not resources identified by its internal member URLs, >> are to >> be copied." >> >> The problem I can see is that if you read this literally, you'd copy the >> bindings to the member resources, which is unlikely to be intended. >> Sounds >> like an erratum to me. >> >> Do you see other problems? > > It follows that the requirement in Section 9.8.4 does not hold if > Depth is 0: > "when a collection is overwritten, the membership of the destination > collection after the successful COPY request MUST be the same > membership as > the source collection immediately before the COPY." > Not necessarily. I think this is intented to prevent a non-empty collection from being overridden by an empty collection. The COPY with Depth:0 must fail then. Regards, Manfred -- Manfred Baedke <green/>bytes GmbH Hafenweg 16 D-48155 Mnster Germany Amtsgericht Mnster: HRB5782
Received on Wednesday, 21 December 2011 12:19:54 UTC