- From: <Tim_Ellison@uk.ibm.com>
- Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 13:05:12 +0100
- To: "WebDAV WG" <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>
"Julian Reschke" <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote: > Understood. So would it possibly make sense to to change > the wording to "he property's data type is defined in [RFC2518]" > (leaving other specifications out)? I still think we don't > need to return the types for RFC2518 defined properties... The RFC2518 defined properties are: creationdate displayname getcontentlanguage getcontentlength getcontenttype getetag getlastmodified lockdiscovery resourcetype source supportedlock So the only ones that I believe would return type info (using the xs:string - exclusion rule) are creationdate -> dateTime getContentLength -> nonNegativeInteger getLastModified -> dateTime So although I don't think it would be a great overhead for servers to return these each time, I don't really care either way. > > It was generally agreed on this list a while back that total > > success may be condensed to a simple 200 OK response. Your > > suggestion would require a further modification to these servers. > > I see. Maybe this should be put onto the issues list then (for > resolution in RFC2518). What is the issue? I don't think that there is any great harm to interop if some servers respond with 200OK and others return 207MultiStatus with 200OK for each response. > Do you think it would be a problem to require the 207 <multistatus> > response in this case? You may get pushback from some server writers. Tim
Received on Friday, 15 June 2001 08:06:56 UTC