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

Proposed resolution for issue "results-vs-binds"

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2002 21:31:16 +0100
To: <www-webdav-dasl@w3.org>
Message-ID: <JIEGINCHMLABHJBIGKBCMECFFOAA.julian.reschke@gmx.de>

Discussion:

julian.reschke@greenbytes.de 2002-06-26
Given a URL space which supports the binding protocol, and which actually
contains multiple binds for a resource matching the search conditions. What
do we expect:
1) only one of the URIs is reported,
2) all of them are reported.
Case 1) may be better for simple clients that aren't aware of the existence
of BIND. Case 2) may be required for more advanced clients (that actually
*want* to find all bindings, and can select DAV:resourceid to decide which
of the reported URIs map to the same resource).

Proposed resolution:

Clarify that servers may report only one of possibly many bindings.
Furthermore, point to DAV:parent-set in the binding spec (which allows
discovery of all other bindings to the same resource).


Julian

[1]
<http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/draft-reschke-webdav-search-latest.html#rf
c.issue.results-vs-binds>
--
<green/>bytes GmbH -- http://www.greenbytes.de -- tel:+492512807760

> -----Original Message-----
> From: www-webdav-dasl-request@w3.org
> [mailto:www-webdav-dasl-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Julian Reschke
> Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 2002 8:40 PM
> To: www-webdav-dasl@w3.org
> Subject: Proposed resolution for issue "null-ordering"
>
>
>
> Discussion:
>
> ameliac@us.ibm.com 2002-02-20
>
> In the WebDAV SEARCH spec (5.6, DAV:orderby), it says that nulls sort low,
> to match SQL92. However, SQL92 and SQL99 both say "Whether a sort
> key value
> that is null is considered greater or less than a non-null value is
> implementation-defined, but all sort key values that are null shall either
> be considered greater than all non-null values or be considered less than
> all non-null values." (words taken from SQL99, 14.1 <declare
> cursor> General
> Rule 2)c), in reference to null handling for the <order by clause>. ) I
> would note that in 5.5.3 WebDAV SEARCH says nulls are less than all other
> values in a comparison, so the DAV:orderby matches that statement, it just
> gives an inaccurate reason.
>
>
> Proposed resolution:
>
> Replace
>
> 	"In the context of the DAV:orderby element, null values are
> considered to
> collate before any actual (i.e., non null) value, including
> strings of zero
> length (as in [SQL99])."
>
> by
>
> 	"In the context of the DAV:orderby element, null values are
> considered to
> collate before any actual (i.e., non null) value, including
> strings of zero
> length."
>
> Feedback appreciated,
>
> Julian
>
>
> [1]
> <http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/draft-reschke-webdav-search-late
> st.html#rf
> c.issue.null-ordering>
> --
> <green/>bytes GmbH -- http://www.greenbytes.de -- tel:+492512807760
>
Received on Wednesday, 27 November 2002 15:31:50 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Sunday, 22 March 2009 03:38:09 GMT