Re: ACR: MKREF on existing resource

I concur on the preference to forbid MKREF on a non-null resource.
We are planning on using references extensively for versioning,
but after a quick survey, I could find no instances where I needed to
do a MKREF on an existing resource.

Cheers,
Geoff

   From: Jim Davis <jdavis@parc.xerox.com>

   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 Friday, 4 December 1998 23:53:14 UTC