RE: version-tree REPORT on non-version-controlled resource

Geoff,

no offense intended.

I think it would be clearer if the status (being a VCR or a version) would explicitly be listed as precondition.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ietf-dav-versioning-request@w3.org
> [mailto:ietf-dav-versioning-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Clemm, Geoff
> Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2002 6:55 PM
> To: ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org
> Subject: RE: version-tree REPORT on non-version-controlled resource
> 
> 
> The meaning of these error codes is defined by 2616,
> and the DeltaV spec makes a point of not repeating information from
> the base spec (so that we automatically inherit any
> later revision of 2616, rather than conflict with it).
> 
> Cheers,
> Geoff
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Julian Reschke [mailto:julian.reschke@greenbytes.de]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2002 12:47 PM
> To: Clemm, Geoff; ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org
> Subject: RE: version-tree REPORT on non-version-controlled resource
> 
> 
> OK,
> 
> this make sense.
> 
> The spec could be a bit clearer, though :-)
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: ietf-dav-versioning-request@w3.org
> > [mailto:ietf-dav-versioning-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Clemm, Geoff
> > Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2002 6:43 PM
> > To: ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org
> > Subject: RE: version-tree REPORT on non-version-controlled resource
> > 
> > 
> > No, not "400:Conflict.
> > 
> > Either "409: Conflict" if the resource could be put under 
> version control,
> > or "403: Forbidden" if the resource cannot be put under version control.
> > 
> > Cheers,
> > Geoff
> > 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Julian Reschke [mailto:julian.reschke@greenbytes.de]
> > Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2002 11:30 AM
> > To: ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org
> > Subject: DAV:version-tree REPORT on non-version-controlled resource
> > 
> > 
> > Hi,
> > 
> > what would be the expected response code for a DAV:version-tree 
> > report on a
> > resource which is not version controlled? Bad Request?
> > 
> > Julian
> > 
> > 
> > 
> 
>

Received on Wednesday, 23 January 2002 13:31:06 UTC