- From: Clemm, Geoff <gclemm@rational.com>
- Date: Thu, 6 Jul 2000 17:20:12 -0400
- To: "'Jim Davis'" <jrd3@alum.mit.edu>, WebDAV WG <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>
I agree with the "client proposes, server disposes" guideline, but currently we are (in my view, inappropriately) limiting what the client can propose. In particular, we are not allowing the client to propose an upper limit such as "20" or "100", even when the client knows that to be the appropriate upper limit for its PROPFIND request. Cheers, Geoff -----Original Message----- From: Jim Davis [mailto:jrd3@alum.mit.edu] Sent: Thursday, July 06, 2000 5:14 PM To: WebDAV WG Subject: RE: [hwarncke@Adobe.COM: Re: [dav-dev] Depth Infinity Requests] At 05:58 PM 7/6/00 +0100, Gary Barnett wrote: >I think that creating a specification that builds in non-deterministic >behaviour would be a real pain. > >I think that the idea of passing a depth value (with perhaps a default value >which all servers support) makes sense from a client perspective. What we gain from the indeterminacy is flexibility. Otherwise, we either set the minimum standard high (and rule out cheap implementations) or set it low (thus requiring all clients to use inefficient methods, and making powerful implementations either useless or non-standard.) Yaron put it like this "The client proposes, the server disposes". Clients should ask for what they want, and be prepared to get less than that.
Received on Thursday, 6 July 2000 21:45:03 UTC