- From: Clemm, Geoff <gclemm@rational.com>
- Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2002 17:22:07 -0400
- To: ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org
- Message-ID: <3906C56A7BD1F54593344C05BD1374B10783928F@SUS-MA1IT01>
I would classify two different servlets as two different servers, and so if the servlet handling the OPTIONS request does not know about the update feature, then it is expected to not return "update" in the DAV header. Cheers, Geoff -----Original Message----- From: Julian Reschke [mailto:julian.reschke@gmx.de] Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2002 5:16 PM To: ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org Subject: again: OPTIONS semantics Just taking an example from section 7: "Additional OPTIONS Semantics If the server supports the update feature, it MUST include "update" as a field in the DAV response header from an OPTIONS request on any resource that supports any versioning properties, reports, or methods." So assuming my DAV namespace is separated into two parts (for instance by servlet) "/a" and "/b". Both parts of the server namespace support versioning, but only "/a" supports workspaces. Should the "update" feature be reported on "/b" and it's descendants? The spec says "yes", but I don't think this is implementable (for instance, the servlet responsible for "/b" may not even know about the existence of "/a"). Julian -- <green/>bytes GmbH -- http://www.greenbytes.de -- tel:+492512807760
Received on Thursday, 26 September 2002 17:23:21 UTC