W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-webdav-dasl@w3.org > July to September 2008

Re: getting WebDAV SEARCH ready for the IESG

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2008 18:23:40 +0200
Message-ID: <48972D0C.3070808@gmx.de>
To: John Barone <jbarone@xythos.com>
CC: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org, www-webdav-dasl@w3.org

John Barone wrote:
>> However, it seems to me that the text in 2.3.1 was phrased this way on
> purpose
>> -- there may be cases where it's not possible to first sort, 
>> then truncate. For instance, when searching can be delegated to an
> underlying 
>> SQL store, but ordering can not, how would you implement that? 
>> Thus, I'm hesitant doing any change over here.
> Completely understood.  I'm just saying a client may not want results
> that aren't ordered over the entire result set.  It might be preferred
> to get no results (and have to further refine the search) than to get
> truncated results that aren't "globaly" ordered.

I do agree that this may be more useful. I'm just skeptic about making 
this change many years after people have written implementations.

>> If you feel strongly about that, we *could* add a statement into the
> "future extensions" appendix.
> I don't feel that strongly about this, just a nice-to-have for some
> clients.
>> And yes, the inconsistency with 5.17.1 is a bit awkward, but I'm
> really not
>> sure we can change this at this point of time.
> This I think is a bigger deal.  If you acknowledge that some servers
> cannot (at least easily) order a global result set and then limit the
> results returned, then how can this be a MUST?  Seems like the same
> issue to me.

I just checked the document's history, and that particular requirement 
was added in 2003, see the thread around 
Back then we probably did not realize that we're introducing an 
inconsistency between truncation (server enforced) and limiting (on 
behalf of the client).

If this is a minor problem, we should just state it somewhere. If it's a 
major problem, we could try to fix it. The server I worked on didn't 
truncate, so I don't have a strong preference. That being said, it would 
be interesting to know how the other servers (Xythos, Catacomb, 
Slide...?) behave...

BR, Julian
Received on Monday, 4 August 2008 16:24:25 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:22:44 UTC