ACR: MKREF on existing resource

3.3.1 says "If a MKREF request is submitted for an existing resource, the
existing resource's content and headers will be overwritten.  This behavior
is analogous to the behavior of the HTTP PUT method. "

I would prefer to forbid MKREF on an non-null resource.

My objections to the specified behavior are:

1. It is problematic if the resource is a collection.  It gives MKREF some
of the semantics of DELETE.  Near as I can tell, WebDAV does not allow PUT
to a collection, or at least leaves it undefined.  Why allow MKREF?

2. We don't allow MKCOL on an existing resource, why allow MKREF?

I don't see any real advantage to it, either.  The only advantage I can see
is that if there are existing dead properties they will be left
undisturbed.  If we decided instead that one must DELETE, then the client
would have to PROPFIND (to get copies of the properties), DELETE, MKREF,
then PROPPATCH (to replace the properties).  This does not seem
unreasonably burdensome to me, and it simplifies  things.

Finally, strictly editorially, I don't know what it means to 'overwrite
headers'.

best wishes

Jim

Received on Thursday, 3 December 1998 22:27:39 UTC