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


From: Greg Stein <gstein@lyra.org>
Date: Thu, 3 May 2001 22:59:19 -0700
To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
Message-ID: <20010503225919.Q1374@lyra.org>
On Wed, May 02, 2001 at 11:53:27PM -0400, Clemm, Geoff wrote:
> I am adamantly opposed to DAV:allprop.  In the context of
> computed live properties, a client should never blindly ask
> for all property values ... it should always first ask for
> DAV:propname, and then use the subset that it can use.

Euh, how does the propname help the computed live prop case? If I fetch all
the names, then fetch the values, then I've still slammed the server with a
bunch of computed props.

Removing allprop does not help this scenario at all.

> The WebDAV versioning extensions explicitly allows a server to
> *not* return the versioning properties in response to a
> DAV:allprop request, so DAV:propname will be the only reliable
> way of obtaining all the properties.

When did that go in? That seems to be a direct violation of RFC 2518.

> Finally, the fact that
> PROPFIND/DAV:allprop is trivially replaceable with two PROPFIND
> calls (the first being PROPFIND/DAV:propname) makes DAV:allprop
> superfluous (in addition to being inadvisable).

It is *NOT* trivial. If you want to do a Depth:1, then the client is going
to have to create a union of all the resources' prop names, then do the
fetch for those props. Next, it will need to deal with the 404 that it will
get for the props that weren't available on all resources.

Trivial? Bah.


Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
Received on Friday, 4 May 2001 01:56:12 UTC

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