W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-webdav-dasl@w3.org > July to September 2002

RE: Scope - only collections?

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Thu, 4 Jul 2002 08:21:41 +0200
To: "Wallmer, Martin" <Martin.Wallmer@softwareag.com>, <www-webdav-dasl@w3.org>
Message-ID: <JIEGINCHMLABHJBIGKBCEECLEOAA.julian.reschke@gmx.de>

> From: www-webdav-dasl-request@w3.org
> [mailto:www-webdav-dasl-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Wallmer, Martin
> Sent: Thursday, July 04, 2002 7:46 AM
> To: 'www-webdav-dasl@w3.org'
> Subject: Scope - only collections?
> Hi,
> chapter 5.4
> (http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/draft-reschke-webdav-search-late
> st.html#rf
> c.section.5.4) states:
> 101 DAV:href indicates the URI for a collection to use as a scope
> 102 When the scope is a collection, ...
> [102] sounds, as if the scope could be anything else. Is this meant so? I
> found a message of Jim Davis in the mailing archive
> (http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webdav-dasl/1998JulSep/0021.html)
> concerning any resource as scope. I would strongly prefer to use any
> resource as scope.

I personally can't see why a collection would be required, and our
implementation doesn't require that. So I agree with Jim and yourself that
this restriction should be lifted (I'll add that to the issues list for

Jim originally proposed to allow any URI as scope. I think that could be
done, although it would probably require some more work to get "depth"
properly defined. Jim, do you think that would be worth the effort?
Received on Thursday, 4 July 2002 02:22:08 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:22:43 UTC