- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2002 09:22:09 +0200
- To: "Clemm, Geoff" <gclemm@rational.com>, "WebDAV" <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>
> From: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org > [mailto:w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Clemm, Geoff > Sent: Monday, April 22, 2002 1:00 AM > To: WebDAV > Subject: RE: displayname vs. Microsoft webfolders > > > There are two possible issues here: > > The first is a UI issue, namely whether a client displays the URI segment > (which is guaranteed to be unique) or the DAV:displayname (which is not > guaranteed to be unique, but is likely to be more human meaningful). > I agree with Jason that we should make no statement about what the client > does wrt display to the user (in particular, I think a sensible GUI may > well chose the DAV:displayname over the segment name as the value > to display > to the user). MS Webfolder does that. The result being that if you rename an internal member and then do a refresh of the window, you see the old name again (because DAV:displayname does not change as well). I'd call this a client problem that could have been avoided with a better description of DAV:displayname. > The second is a protocol issue, namely, does a client assume it can use > the DAV:displayname as an "alternative segment name" to identify the > resource > (i.e. it can use that display name to compose a URL for that resource). > This is blatantly wrong. I assumed Julian was encountering the latter > situation, and that is what I agreed with disallowing ... Julian? MS Webfolder seems to *internally* keep the right URL, yet it displays the wrong one (both as member name and in the "href" column).
Received on Monday, 22 April 2002 03:22:43 UTC