W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-webdav-dasl@w3.org > July to September 1999

Re: DASL Protocol Nits

From: Jim Davis <jrd3@alum.mit.edu>
Date: Fri, 02 Jul 1999 10:21:38 -0700
Message-Id: <4.1.19990702101353.00a43200@192.168.254.128>
To: "Slein, Judith A" <JSlein@crt.xerox.com>, www-webdav-dasl@w3.org
At 12:33 PM 7/2/99 -0400, Slein, Judith A wrote:
>I just have a few minor issues and suggestions for the DASL protocol spec:

thanks for your careful reading

>1.  It might be useful to define a new value for DAV:resourcetype to
>identify search arbiters.

Jim Whitehead suggested this too.  it's issue JW2b on the issues list.

>2.  In section 2.5.1 the last sentence before the example -- is this saying
>that even if the results are ordered, I may not be getting back the first n
>results, but any arbitrary n results (though the ones I get will be sorted
>according to the sortby clause)?

No.  the paragraph before that covers this case.  Care to suggest better
wording?

>2. Section 2.6.1 says "Each DAV:resource in the DAV:multistatus identifies a
>scope."  It should say "Each DAV:response..."

Thanks, will be fixed in next version. 

>3. In section 5.5.2, change "If a query provides . . ." to "If a query
>contains . . ."

thanks

>4. In section 5.5.3, I think the first sentence should read "If a PROPFIND
>for a property value . . ."

Thanks

>5. Typo in the 3rd paragraph of section 5.5.3.  "less then" should be "less
>than".

thanks

>6.  In the example at the end of section 5.19.8, "<D:propdesc>" should be
>"<D:opdesc>".

Eh? the properties element contains propdesc elements, and the operators
contains opdesc elements.  Is there a propdesc that should be an opdesc?
Received on Friday, 2 July 1999 13:21:52 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Sunday, 22 March 2009 03:38:04 GMT