- From: Eric Sedlar <Eric.Sedlar@oracle.com>
- Date: Fri, 4 May 2001 09:23:02 -0700
- To: "Acl@Webdav.Org" <acl@webdav.org>
- Cc: <ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <NDBBLFOFMCKOOMBDHDBKMEKPCBAA.Eric.Sedlar@oracle.com>
I've been successfully converted by Yaron to the belief that we should use <dav:resourcetype> to indicate multiple pieces of type information (like the set of interfaces supported) in the new standards (ACL, DeltaV, RFC2518-- the sequel). This would mean that you might see something like: <dav:resourcetype> <dav:collection/><dav:principal/><dav:versioned/> </dav:resourcetype> as a property of a group (a collection principal) that is under version control, rather than <is-principal> and <is-versioned>. The major reason NOT to use <dav:resourcetype> was the WebFolders bug, but I've now heard from multiple source that WebFolders has so many bugs in it that it isn't worth excessive deference (and something like WebDrive is what people ACTUALLY use), that Microsoft is rewriting this for Windows XP, and the point that we'll just have to create another property to do the same thing. This also helps clients now that future properties like <is-principal> are type information, since they will be grouped under <dav:resourcetype>. However, I'm only in favor of making this change if we can apply it to ACL, DeltaV and add clarifying examples in the new RFC2518. --Eric
Received on Friday, 4 May 2001 12:30:23 UTC