- From: Clemm, Geoff <gclemm@rational.com>
- Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2001 09:54:15 -0500
- To: WebDAV <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>
I agree that that PATCHPUT (aka MULTIPUT) is of significantly more value than FINDGET, so I withdraw my suggestion that it be accompanied by FINDGET. I see good arguments for and against PATCHPUT, so I will sit on the fence on this one. Cheers, Geoff -----Original Message----- From: Dylan Barrell [mailto:dbarrell@opentext.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2001 9:08 AM To: Clemm, Geoff; WebDAV Subject: RE: Ideas: GETSRC & MULTIPUT The reason for MULTIPUT is so that servers can enforce property rules on resources when they are created. MULTIGET doesn't add any additional value so I could live without MULTIGET. --Dylan > -----Original Message----- > From: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org > [mailto:w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Clemm, Geoff > Sent: Monday, October 29, 2001 4:18 PM > To: WebDAV > Subject: RE: Ideas: GETSRC & MULTIPUT > > > Why isn't GETSRC just a GET on the DAV:dst of the DAV:source property? > (If it is just a shorthand for this, I'm against the redundant marshalling > of this request through a new method). > > As for MULTIPUT, that sounds fine to me, but it should be accompanied by > a MULTIGET, which would allow reading of a resource and its metadata in > one transaction. > > Cheers, > Geoff > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jim Whitehead [mailto:ejw@cse.ucsc.edu] > Sent: Monday, October 29, 2001 3:14 PM > To: WebDAV > Subject: Ideas: GETSRC & MULTIPUT > > > I'm interested in the list's thoughts on two ideas for DAV improvements: > > The first is to introduce a GETSRC method to support access to the > unprocessed source of a resource. This would decouple the dynamic response > of a resource (GET) from its static source (GETSRC). > > The second is to introduce the MULTIPUT method to support "PUT with > PROPPATCH" scenarios. MULTIPUT would accept some subset of multipart MIME > packages and atomically write them to the server. This would support the > update of a resource and its metadata in one transaction. > > - Jim
Received on Tuesday, 30 October 2001 09:54:52 UTC