W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-dist-auth@w3.org > October to December 2016

Re: feedback on draft-murchison-webdav-prefer-09

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2016 22:21:20 +0100
To: Ken Murchison <murch@andrew.cmu.edu>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, WebDAV <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>
Message-ID: <931ccd58-e3fc-bda4-98a7-423a5a960641@gmx.de>
On 2016-11-15 22:07, Ken Murchison wrote:
>
>
> On 11/15/2016 03:59 PM, Julian Reschke wrote:
>> On 2016-11-15 21:56, Ken Murchison wrote:
>>
>>> Just to clarify, which methods do you think need to have additional
>>> references?  PROPFIND, REPORT, and PROPPATCH because we alter the
>>> responses for return=minimal?  Also keep in mind the the server is
>>> always free to ignore the preference if it so chooses.
>>
>> Those, plus MKCOL, right?
>
> Hmm.  I'm not sure we alter anything specified by 4918 or 5689 for
> MKCOL.  Maybe there is an argument that we alter the MKCALENDAR response.

Aren't we altering the response for extended MKCOL?

> I do wonder why 5689 isn't listed as a reference for MKCOL since it adds
> a request body.

Oversight, I would say.
Received on Tuesday, 15 November 2016 21:22:06 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 15 November 2016 21:22:07 UTC