- From: John Turner <johnt@cgocable.net>
- Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1998 08:31:53 +0600
- To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
First off, I don't beleve that WebDAV can't have anything to say about the choice of the namespace shape. It can (and does) require that URL's ending in "/" act like collections but can't say what collections exist and what goes in them. If a site chooses to put all of their documents into one collection and all of their "folders" into another, and not allow any to be created anywhere else that is a perfecly valid choice. Unfortunately it is not very helpful for someone trying to get at the site with a generic WebDAV client. Requiring that there also be a hierarchical representation is not something that WebDAV can do. On the other hand, users of a system probably will :-) Mapping the project/folder hierarchy from DM systems onto a tree has a couple of difficulties that I can see. First is that objects from the DM system can appear in the tree in more than one place. Second is that cycles can exist. I don't think WebDAV says anything specifically banning the first, but I would be curious as to other people's views on this. The second problem relates to depth infinity operations and to user navigation. Some of the depth infinity operations such as copy and move can be worked out fairly easily, but PROPFIND is a problem. In addition, users navigating down through a cycle can get arbitrarily deep, with arbitrarily long URLs. John Turner johnt@cgocable.net
Received on Friday, 14 August 1998 08:33:17 UTC