- From: Geoffrey M. Clemm <geoffrey.clemm@rational.com>
- Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2001 10:14:10 -0500 (EST)
- To: ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org
From: Tim_Ellison@uk.ibm.com Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2001 11:33:04 +0000 >> Secondly, I agree that there are a number of >> places where the marshaling is underspecified >> with respect to (usually) error conditions >> (though in this case it is a 200 OK response). >> For example, in REPORT "the response body MUST >> contain the requested report" and "The >> DAV:version-tree REPORT response body MUST be >> a DAV:multistatus XML element." > > I didn't quite follow your point here Tim ... could you restate > or clarify? Simply that when, say DAV:version-tree REPORT is in error, it returns an extended status element body (contrary to "The DAV:version-tree REPORT response body MUST be a DAV:multistatus XML element.") OK, I think I get it. These statements should be qualified by "if the request succeeds". Will this address your concern? Cheers, Geoff
Received on Monday, 5 February 2001 10:15:08 UTC