W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-dist-auth@w3.org > April to June 2001

Re: Issue: PROP_ATTR

From: Greg Stein <gstein@lyra.org>
Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2001 13:54:00 -0700
To: WebDAV WG <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20010415135400.D31832@lyra.org>
On Sun, Apr 15, 2001 at 11:14:33AM +0200, Julian F. Reschke wrote:
> As I said, both point of views are possible. However, your position seems to
> be:
> value = Infoset of all child elements *plus* the optional xml:lang attribute

Yes, because the xml:lang value is scoped, and the property value occurs
within that scope.

And this isn't just because xml:lang occurs on the property name element; it
could be three levels higher in scope.

> How do you put the value of xml:lang into the serialization of the element's
> contents? Sure, that's again an implementation issue, but including the
> element itself certainly makes it easier.

Nope. It could occur higher in scope, so it might not be on the property
name element at all. Thus, serializing the name isn't going to help with
preserving the xml:lang value.

I store the xml:lang and the (serialized) value as two items of data in the
property database.

> > My point is that it is more difficult for server implementors if
> > you want to
> > state that the attributes on the name element are part of the property
> > value, and (thus) need to be stored.
> While my point is that it makes absolutely no difference at all :-)

As an implementor of a server, I would disagree :-)

I just want to see the language state something to the effect of: all
attributes on elements, which are children of the name element, MUST be
preserved; attributes on the name element MAY be preserved. [ plus the
language about xml:lang ]

> Maybe we need to collect all issues regarding this topic before going back
> to this one. For instance, if somebody would want to store an XSLT or an XSD
> schema as a property value, he probably would expect that namespace prefix
> information is preserved as well...

They're SOL with (at least) mod_dav. It doesn't preserve prefixes. That is
potentially another issue for the RFC 2518 issues list (I have an opinion,
but that can occur under a separate issue thread).


Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
Received on Sunday, 15 April 2001 16:52:05 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:01:22 UTC