W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-webdav-dasl@w3.org > January to March 2003

RE: issue: unprecise wording in appendix A (three-valued-logic)

From: Jim Whitehead <ejw@cse.ucsc.edu>
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 12:21:48 -0800
To: <www-webdav-dasl@w3.org>
Message-ID: <AMEPKEBLDJJCCDEJHAMIIECHGDAA.ejw@cse.ucsc.edu>
Yes, this language in the specification looks good to me. It might be
helpful to explicitly state:

(NULL value)  SORTS-BEFORE  (empty value)  SORTS-BEFORE  (non-empty value)

- Jim
  -----Original Message-----
  From: www-webdav-dasl-request@w3.org
[mailto:www-webdav-dasl-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Julian Reschke
  Sent: Wednesday, January 15, 2003 10:45 AM
  To: www-webdav-dasl@w3.org
  Subject: RE: issue: unprecise wording in appendix A (three-valued-logic)


  Elias & Jim,

  I think the spec is very clear about the difference about undefined
properties, and properties that *are* defined and just happen to have an
empty value. In particular:


http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/draft-reschke-webdav-search-latest.html#nul
l-values

  Julian

  --
  <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 Elias Sinderson
    Sent: Wednesday, January 15, 2003 7:19 PM
    To: www-webdav-dasl@w3.org
    Subject: Re: issue: unprecise wording in appendix A (three-valued-logic)


    Hi,

    I feel that removing the sentence will lead to interoperability issues
in the future - it would be better to simply clarify the issue as Jim
suggests. How about something along the lines of the following:

"If a property in the current resource under scan has not been set to a
value (either because the property itself is undefined or the property is
empty for the current resource), then the value of that property is
undefined for the resource under scan."

Perhaps another sentence to explain how undefined values are sorted?


    Elias



    Jim Whitehead wrote:

I think it would help interoperability to add a sentence (or 1-2 short
examples) that stated how DASL implementations should treat
empty/"undefined" DAV properties.

Frankly, I can see myself not getting this right...

- Jim


-----Original Message-----
From: www-webdav-dasl-request@w3.org
[mailto:www-webdav-dasl-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Julian Reschke
Sent: Tuesday, October 22, 2002 7:20 AM
To: www-webdav-dasl@w3.org
Subject: issue: unprecise wording in appendix A (three-valued-logic)



In [1] the current draft says:

"If a property in the current resource under scan has not been set to a
value (either because the property is not defined for the current
resource,
or because it is null for the current resource), then the value of that
property is undefined for the resource under scan."

However, WebDAV properties never have a "null" value. They may be empty,
such as

	<foo xmlns="bar" />

or

	<foo xmlns="bar"></foo>

but that's just a string value with length 0.

Proposal: just remove that sentence.




[1]
<http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/draft-reschke-webdav-search-late

st.html#rf
c.section.A.p.3>
--
<green/>bytes GmbH -- http://www.greenbytes.de -- tel:+492512807760
Received on Wednesday, 15 January 2003 15:26:30 GMT

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