- From: Clemm, Geoff <gclemm@rational.com>
- Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2002 14:02:02 -0400
- To: "'Deltav WG'" <ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org>
From: Lisa Dusseault [mailto:ldusseault@xythos.com] Geoff said: > PROPFIND /a > Depth: 1 > Label: labeltest > Assuming /a is not version-controlled, then the effect of the Label > header is undefined, so your implementation could just ignore the > Label header and return the properties of /a, or it could indicate > that it is an error for /a. > > Since /a/b is version-controlled, the effect is defined by section > 8.6, and you would return the properties of the version labeled > "labeltest". This is interesting -- I thought that the RFC said that the label header must be ignored if the resource is not version-controlled. Thus, it would be *wrong* to return an error for /a. Lisa is of course correct. Section 8.3 covers this case. So yes, it must be ignored for a non-version-controlled resource, so it would be wrong to return an error for /a. Boy, nothing like a little jet lag to short-circuit the ol' brain cells (:-). I don't see any definition of what should happen, BTW, if the "labeltest" label does not exist on /a/b -- however the resource is version-controlled. Is that an error? How is the client supposed to be able to tell the difference between a version-controlled resource for which the label exists, and a version-controlled resource for which the label doesn't exist? See section 8.6, the DAV:must-select-version-in-history precondition. It is an error if you request a label that does not exist on a given VCR. Cheers, Geoff
Received on Monday, 22 April 2002 14:02:37 UTC