- From: Kevin Wiggen <wiggs@wiggenout.com>
- Date: Thu, 06 Jul 2000 09:27:35 -0700
- To: Hartmut.Warncke@Adobe.COM, WebDAV WG <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>
I believe we should follow the DASL spec on this one. Dasl allows a server to send a 507 if the query produced more results than the server is willing to transmit. Partial Results have been transmitted. This is the implementation on the Xythos Storage Server for both SEARCH and PROPFIND. Kevin -----Original Message----- From: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Hartmut Warncke Sent: Thursday, July 06, 2000 8:23 AM To: WebDAV WG Subject: Re: [hwarncke@Adobe.COM: Re: [dav-dev] Depth Infinity Requests] I am of the opinion that disallowing depth infinity PROPFINDS would cut off one of the main WebDAV features. In order to explain that opinion I would like to give you a short example how we use WebDAV in Adobe GoLive 5.0 (the following sample is not a theoretical one it's out of the everday life of a GoLive user): Imagine that you need the modification dates of 1000 resources on the server in order to synchronize the resources on the server with the resources on your local machine. Even if the resources are located in a directory with a very deep hierarchy it's not a problem with a depth infinity PROPFIND. You ask the server for the dates and get the response for all the 1000 resources within one Network request/ response. On the other hand if you stick to PROPFIND Depth: 1 you end up in a tremendous drawback (a ftp-like solution) because the client software has to go down the hierarchy step by step and ask for the content of each directory level. The User has to be very patient in that scenario ... So to my mind the infinity PROPFIND is a main WebDAV feature for practical purposes. In addition to that I would like to draw your attention to the fact that it is very difficult to base a software implementation on a WebDAV RFC which changes frequently because we are not able to ship a new Release of our software every two weeks. Hartmut "Clemm, Geoff" wrote: > I think we should disallow Depth:infinity on a PROPFIND, and require that > the client pass in some maximum depth to let the server know when it > should stop. > > Cheers, > Geoff
Received on Thursday, 6 July 2000 12:37:18 UTC