- From: Roy T. Fielding <fielding@kiwi.ICS.UCI.EDU>
- Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2000 16:38:44 -0800
- To: "Slein, Judith A" <JSlein@crt.xerox.com>
- cc: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
>A binding is a relation between a segment S in a collection C and a resource >R, represented C:(S->R). We are saying that when a server agrees to create >a binding, it MUST guarantee that the binding will continue to exist until >one of the following happens: > >DELETE with a Request-URI whose final segment is S and the rest of the URI >identifies collection C >MOVE with a Request-URI whose final segment is S and the rest of the URI >identifies collection C >BIND with a Destination whose final segment is S and the rest of the URI >identifies collection C, and Overwrite is T >DELETE the last binding to collection C > >It is not acceptable for a binding to be destroyed as a side effect of any >other operation. I don't understand why this is a requirement of bindings. It certainly isn't a requirement of normal resources. Why should the requirements on bound names be stronger than the names they bind to? ....Roy
Received on Thursday, 20 January 2000 19:38:50 UTC