RE: discovery of search arbiters, was: Comments on search-00 draft

> From: www-webdav-dasl-request@w3.org
> [mailto:www-webdav-dasl-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Lisa Dusseault
> Sent: Friday, March 29, 2002 6:33 PM
> To: 'Julian Reschke'; www-webdav-dasl@w3.org
> Subject: RE: discovery of search arbiters, was: Comments on search-00
> draft
>
>
> > However, AFAIK in *current* implementations *each* WebDAV
> > research can act
> > as a SEARCH arbiter. In which case the discovery is trivial
> > (just look at
> > DAV:supported-search-grammar or DAV:supported-method-set).
>
> This is part of my point.  If in all current implementations, every WebDAV
> collection (resource?) can act as an arbiter, why not require that for
> basicsearch support?  Is there some prospective SEARCH implementation that
> couldn't handle that?

There could be some. Basically, you could have a search arbiter on server a
which allows generic DAV.basicsearch queries on remote WebDAV servers (which
only support standard PROPFIND).

What would be the benefit of requiring this?

Received on Friday, 29 March 2002 15:30:24 UTC