- From: Dan Brotsky <dbrotsky@Adobe.COM>
- Date: Thu, 3 May 2001 10:16:53 -0700
- To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
I think we might be able to close on this issue if we consider it pragmatically: 1. We are having a great deal of difficulty deciding on a single semantics for ALLPROP that fits well with the various related specs (e.g., delta-V). 2. We already seem to have general agreement on a change in the default semantics for ALLPROP (i.e., no depth infinity and the default if not specified changes to 0) that's incompatible with the current draft (and thus current versions of clients). From these two I conclude that there's no way that ALLPROP in the next draft is going to have the same semantics as ALLPROP in the last draft. Thus existing clients who use ALLPROP are going to have to be rewritten to be compatible with servers going forward. So we're faced with two alternatives---preserve ALLPROP and change clients, or give up on ALLPROP and change clients---which IMHO differ very little for client implementors but which are quite different for server implementors (the first being harder than the second). As a server implementor, I vote for option 2: abandon allprop. As a client implementor (which I also am), I can live equally with either (as long as it means that servers are CONSISTENT, which is easier with option 2). Are there any client implementors out there who strongly believe that changing to a new semantics for ALLPROP is harder for them than just doing PROPNAME then PROPFIND? dan P.S. Yes I realize that server implementors who implement cross-server COPY and MOVE are also client implementors, and should feel free to respond from that perspective! -d. -- Daniel Brotsky, Adobe Systems tel 408-536-4150, pager 877-704-4062 2-way pager email: <mailto:page-dbrotsky@adobe.com>
Received on Thursday, 3 May 2001 13:21:07 UTC