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

RE: JW3: What if search arbiter is in a query scope

From: Yaron Goland (Exchange) <yarong@Exchange.Microsoft.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 1999 15:53:55 -0700
Message-ID: <078292D50C98D2118D090008C7E9C6A60194743F@STAY.platinum.corp.microsoft.com>
To: "'Jim Whitehead'" <ejw@ics.uci.edu>, "'DASL'" <www-webdav-dasl@w3.org>
I fail to understand how the search arbiter being a new resource type and
the query question related. I would like to see search arbiters as a new
resource type so I can do queries looking for all the arbiters on a server.
I also would like to see search arbiters as a new resource type so that I
can check the resource type of the search arbiter, see that it is a search
arbiter and know that it follows certain rules and regulations.

		Yaron

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jim Whitehead [mailto:ejw@ics.uci.edu]
> Sent: Monday, August 16, 1999 3:40 PM
> To: 'DASL'
> Subject: RE: JW3: What if search arbiter is in a query scope
> 
> 
> 
> 
> > I would recommend not putting search arbiters in
> > the scope of a query, and would expect that to be the
> > normal case.
> 
> I anticipate many servers making each collection a search 
> arbiter, and hence
> a search arbiter would likely end up in the scope of many queries.
> 
> > If someone implements that, then that search arbiter would 
> obviously have
> to
> > respond like any other resource in the scope of a query responds.
> 
> But, I do find myself agreeing with this.  If a search 
> arbiter is not a new
> resource type, as I now favor, then the behavior under search is no
> different than if the same resource didn't support the SEARCH method.
> 
> If there is agreement that a search arbiter isn't a new 
> resource type, this
> issue can also be closed.
> 
> - Jim
> 
Received on Monday, 16 August 1999 18:56:29 GMT

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