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

RE: PROP_ATTR: consensus points

From: Julian F. Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2001 00:01:06 +0200
To: "Jim Whitehead" <ejw@cse.ucsc.edu>, "WebDAV WG" <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>
Message-ID: <AFEIKENBELCNEGJFCENGMEJPDCAA.julian.reschke@gmx.de>
> From: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org
> [mailto:w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Jim Whitehead
> Sent: Monday, April 16, 2001 7:53 PM
> To: WebDAV WG
> Subject: PROP_ATTR: consensus points
> OK, let me see if I can summarize the points of rough consensus in this
> discussion of the PROP_ATTR issue. From reading this thread, there were
> several distinct issues raised:
> * Should the server persistently store XML attribute information:
> (a) on the
> property contents, and (b) on the property name element.
> * Is XML a marshalling format, or MUST the server store property
> information
> as XML?
> * What is the behavior of the server on round-tripping XML attribute
> information of all kinds (including XML namespaces, xml:lang, and other
> standard, and user-defined attributes).
> I believe we have come to consensus on the first two issues:
> 1. The server MUST persistently store XML attribute information stored on
> XML elements contained by the XML element whose name is the name of the
> property.
> (A simpler way to describe this is: The server MUST persistently store XML
> attribute information stored on XML elements in a property's value. But,
> since we haven't agreed yet on what the "value" of a property is, I wanted
> to express the consensus point without using the "value" term).


> 2. I believe there is *rough* consensus that XML attributes on
> the property
> name element MAY be persistently stored, unless explicitly noted as an
> exception in the protocol specification (i.e., XML namespaces and
> xml:lang.)

I think we should try to use a consistent vocabulary. If we use the XML
infoset (or the XPath) data model, XML namespace declarations are "namespace
nodes". They just happen to be expressed as attributes in the

> 3. XML is a marshalling format for the name and value of a property; the
> server is free to use whatever persistent storage format it desires.

...but it will have to use a format that allows him to recreate the XML
infoset of the property element's contents (or a to-be-defined subset of

> I was not able to detect consensus on the round-tripping issues.  However,
> this is far enough away from the original scope of PROP_ATTR that I have
> created a new issue for this, called PROP_ROUNDTRIP.

Fine with me.
Received on Monday, 16 April 2001 18:01:42 UTC

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