RE: Proposal for marshalling property type information

I like it!

> -----Original Message-----
> From: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org
> [mailto:w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Dan Brotsky
> Sent: Monday, June 25, 2001 12:24 PM
> To: WebDAV Working Group
> Subject: RE: Proposal for marshalling property type information
> 
> 
> I also like Julian's proposal and would be glad to see it 
> incorporated into 2518.  But there are a few questions related to 
> live properties that I'm hoping Julian and others would comment on:
> 
> 1. I work on a number of servers that have specialized live 
> ("computed" in the deltaV sense) properties for workflow tracking. 
> It seems that we could use the extended PROPFIND to indicate to 
> clients the datatype of those properties, but Julian only shows an 
> example where the client has indicated the datatype.  Were live 
> properties expected to obey the same extension rule?  If so we might 
> want to clarify this and add an example.
> 
> 2.  Some of my servers implement "type-restricted" live properties 
> which are essentially dead properties whose values are restricted to 
> a certain datatype.  These servers will reject PROPPATCH requests 
> that use the wrong datatype whether or not the client has declared a 
> datatype in the PROPPATCH.  Julian's proposal shows an example of a 
> 422 response when the PROPPATCH-declared datatype doesn't match the 
> datatype of the value; I would also like to use such a response when 
> the value's datatype doesn't match the PROPFIND-shown (and enforced) 
> datatype.  How does this strike people?
> 
>      dan
> -- 
> Daniel Brotsky, Adobe Systems
> tel 408-536-4150, pager 877-704-4062
> 2-way pager email: <mailto:page-dbrotsky@adobe.com>
> 
>

Received on Monday, 25 June 2001 23:14:01 UTC