- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@greenbytes.de>
- Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2002 15:17:23 +0200
- To: "Tim Ellison" <Tim_Ellison@uk.ibm.com>, "Deltav WG" <ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org>
> From: ietf-dav-versioning-request@w3.org > [mailto:ietf-dav-versioning-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Tim Ellison > Sent: Monday, April 22, 2002 3:10 PM > To: Deltav WG > Subject: RE: Label header vs PROPFIND depth 1 > > > > "Julian Reschke" <julian.reschke@greenbytes.de> > > > I think it breaks a very basic assumption about PROPFIND's depth > handling: > > for a given collection member, you will get the same response > element for > > depth:1 on it's parent and depth:0 for a PROPFIND on itself. > > Wait, maybe I didn't make it clear. The label: header applies to the Seems so. > version-controlled resource identified by the request-URL; and then the > depth operation proceeds on the labelled *version*. The only version with > members is a versioned collection, whose members are version histories. This seems to apply to the case where I have version controlled resources in a version controlled collection. But what happens if the collection itself isn't version-controlled? > > What's the motivation for this change? Currently I can't think of a > reason, > > and it certainly makes it harder to come up for consistent variant > handling > > in WebDAV. > > It is a short-hand for referencing the version associated with a > version-controlled resource. Misunderstanding :-) I wasn't asking for the motivation for this *feature*, I was asking for the motivation for changing a basic feature about how PROPFIND works on collections...
Received on Monday, 22 April 2002 09:17:52 UTC