- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@greenbytes.de>
- Date: Fri, 23 Nov 2001 17:27:51 +0100
- To: "Jason Crawford" <ccjason@us.ibm.com>
- Cc: <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>
Thanks, Jason. We'd probably need to cover some more issues: - how does a server decide which NS to use in a reply if the request didn't contain a body (PROPFIND for instance), - clarification, that <foo xmlns="DAV:"/> and <foo xmlns="newuri..." /> map to *identical* properties, - and probably some more details... Julian > -----Original Message----- > From: Jason Crawford [mailto:ccjason@us.ibm.com] > Sent: Friday, November 23, 2001 5:06 PM > To: Julian Reschke > Cc: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org > Subject: RE: RFC2518 (WebDAV) / RFC2396 (URI) inconsistency > > > > I think Julian is right. > > The specs conflict. > It sounds like the other specs are not going to change. At least not > 2396. > It does sound like some of us feel that what 2518 specifies isn't really > what should have been specified. > > I'll support the suggestion that > > 1) We pick a second URI for our namespace. I'll suggest > http://webdav.org/base. > 2) We update the spec to use this new URI in the examples. > 3) We deprecate DAV: as the namespace URI in the spec. > 4) ASAP implementors start accepting the new URI in addition to DAV: > 5) Later implementors can start transmitting the new URI. > > J. > > ------------------------------------------ > Phone: 914-784-7569, ccjason@us.ibm.com > > > >
Received on Friday, 23 November 2001 11:27:57 UTC