- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 07:19:04 +0200
- To: <w3c-dist-auth@w3c.org>
- Cc: "Jim Luther" <luther.j@apple.com>, "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@apache.org>, "Greg Stein" <gstein@lyra.org>
Hi, first of all I really have a problem with the language here. WebDAV clients that implement RFC2518 and RFC2616 (minus erratum published in March 2001) *to the letter* suddenly are called "broken". It's good that the erratum for RFC2616 allows clients to follow the redirect automatically. However, I think the following issues remain: 1) Roy says: > That is correct. And, BTW, RFC 2518 is in fact incorrect in the paragraph > quoted, something which I stated numerous times when it was a draft. > There are no known examples of HTTP servers for which the URI without a > slash is the SAME RESOURCE as the URI with a slash. Automatically > providing two different URI for the same resource, particularly when > they cross hierarchical syntax, instantly doubles the application > name space (bad for IR and QA) and creates holes in access control. > That is why ALL general HTTP servers provide PERMANENT REDIRECTS > >from a WRONG URL to a better URL for the sake of stupid authors of > broken references. They have never been the same resource on any > server for which I have ever had readable code. In this case this needs to be put on the RFC2518 issues list. 2) In the particular case of moddav2, we're stuck with a situation where an additional roundtrip is required to PROPFIND information about a resource (if it's not known in advance to be a collection). I'm still interested in an approch where the roundtip can be avoided. 3) WebDAV's namespace model is not completely compatible to HTTPs: every WebDAV compliant URL namespace conforms to RFC2616, but not the other way round. That's a fact the WebDAV WG has to deal with. In particular: Given a collection /a and HTTP resources "/a/b" and "/a/b/" (where "/a/b" and "/a/b/" are NOT the same resource) -- what should a PROPFIND on /a with depth 1 report? I can think of (a) it should fail (because "/a" isn't a WebDAV compliant collection), (b) it silently suppresses the response element for "/a/b" or (c) it reports both. Looking at RFC2518, section 5.2 [1], (c) seems to be possible but I'm sure that few WebDAV clients are prepared to handle this. Is anybody aware of a WebDAV server that *does* dinstinguish between "/a/b" and "/a/b/" and behaves as described in (c)? (Can I configure Apache2/moddav to handle this situation?). Feedback appreciated, Julian [1] <http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/rfc2518.html#rfc.section.5.2>
Received on Wednesday, 19 June 2002 01:19:35 UTC