- From: Geoffrey M. Clemm <geoffrey.clemm@rational.com>
- Date: Sun, 4 Feb 2001 16:37:39 -0500 (EST)
- To: ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org
From: "Lisa Dusseault" <lisa@xythos.com> > I guess that I'm of a different opinion -- namely that URLs are > cheap and not in danger of being all 'used up'. In fact, it's not so much that that URLs are scarce, but that good user interfaces are difficult. How do I explain what URL namespaces are reserved for special-purpose resources like VRs, VHRs, or (to take an example from another realm) principals? At least you could give me a good error message to return when users try to create new resources or collections in reserved namespaces! I think that a 405 status return, along with an Allow header indicating what MKxxx method would succeed in this space (if any) gives you all the information you can really use. > The spec. explicitly allows > versioning metadata to reside on other hosts, so you can (dare I say, > easily) virtually host the metadata in it's own URL namespace without > impinging on the creativity of clients. How, then, can the client be expected to COPY where the source is a version URL, and the destination is a working resource? To the client it "looks like" the source and destination are on different hosts, and the client might reasonably expect this not to work, since most servers don't implement server-to-server copy. It seems like a sensible client should try the COPY first rather than guessing it will fail. And if it fails, a client can just do the appropriate GET/PUT/PROPFIND/PROPPATCH. Cheers, Geoff
Received on Sunday, 4 February 2001 16:38:40 UTC