- From: John Stracke <francis@appoint.net>
- Date: Tue, 16 Feb 1999 18:48:56 +0000
- To: WebDAV WG <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>
In section 4.15 of the current Advanced Collections protocol Draft, we have: In a request-URI /segment1/segment2/segment3, any of the paths /segment1/, /segment1/segment2/ or /segment1/segment2/segment3 may identify a reference. (See [URI], Section 3.3, for definitions of "path" and "segment".) If any segment except the last segment of the path identifies a reference, that reference MUST have as its target a collection. Otherwise, the request will fail. I'm not sure this MUST is appropriate in all cases. Suppose /segment1 is a reference that points to a CGI script? CGI includes the PATH_INFO header, which means that CGI scripts can be written that behave as collections. So, if /segment1 points to /foo.cgi, then it may be reasonable for /segment1/segment2/segment3 to get redirected to /foo.cgi/segment2/segment3. I believe that a more appropriate behavior may be for the server to expand the path and either pass back the resulting URI without prejudice (if it's a redirect reference) or process it exactly as if the resulting URI had come in in the first place (if it's a direct ref). If this results in an error, fine; but don't add extra rules that will create errors where none may be needed. (Yes, there are efficiency issues in having the redirect reference point the client at an invalid URI; but, given weak refs, we already have them.) -- /==============================================================\ |John Stracke | My opinions are my own |S/MIME & HTML OK | |francis@appoint.net|==========================================| |Chief Scientist |NT's lack of reliability is only surpassed| |Appoint.Net, Inc. | by its lack of scalability. -- John Kirch| \==============================================================/ CUBElink Internet Services.
Received on Tuesday, 16 February 1999 13:47:52 UTC