- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Sat, 23 Feb 2002 09:52:13 +0100
- To: "Jim Whitehead" <ejw@cse.ucsc.edu>, "Jason Crawford" <ccjason@us.ibm.com>, <w3c-dist-auth@w3c.org>
So, going back to my original question...: it *is* permissible for a server to - deny setting the property DAV:contentclass (until it is defined in an IETF specification) and to - report "not found" upon PROPFIND without actually *checking* dead properties. Right? > -----Original Message----- > From: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org > [mailto:w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Jim Whitehead > Sent: Saturday, February 23, 2002 1:45 AM > To: Jason Crawford; w3c-dist-auth@w3c.org > Subject: RE: Using DAV namespace for proprietary properties > > > I strongly feel that a revision of RFC 2518 should state that the "dav:" > property namespace is reserved for use by IETF-approved Standards-Track > specifications, and that client implementations MUST NOT use this > namespace > for application-specific properties. > > Pragmatically, I think existing exceptions to this rule should be > grandfathered. > > - Jim > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org > > [mailto:w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Jason Crawford > > Sent: Friday, February 22, 2002 10:44 AM > > To: w3c-dist-auth@w3c.org > > Subject: Re: Using DAV namespace for proprietary properties > > > > > > Let me phrase this differently... :-) > > > > Does anyone besides Julian... :-) > > > > ...feel there is a change in the 2518 spec needed in regard to the > > following posting by Julian... :-) > > > > Please speak up. > > > > > > > currently RFC2518 is silent on this issue. > > > > > > However, deltaV says 1.5 [1]: "Although WebDAV request and > > > response bodies > > > can be extended by arbitrary XML elements, which can be ignored by the > > > message recipient, an XML element in the DAV namespace MUST NOT > > > be used in > > > the request or response body of a versioning method unless that > > > XML element > > > is explicitly defined in an IETF RFC." > > > > > > I think something similar needs to be added to the revision > to RFC2518. > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > > > To: w3c-dist-auth@w3c.org > > Message-ID: <OF5FC2C470.C50DFF6B-ON85256B66.00704BB6@pok.ibm.com> > > From: "Jason Crawford" <ccjason@us.ibm.com> > > Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2002 15:29:33 -0500 > > Subject: Re: Using DAV namespace for proprietary properties > > > > Do we feel there is a change in the 2518 spec needed in regard to the > > following posting by Julian... > > > > > > > currently RFC2518 is silent on this issue. > > > > > > However, deltaV says 1.5 [1]: "Although WebDAV request and response > > bodies > > > can be extended by arbitrary XML elements, which can be ignored by the > > > message recipient, an XML element in the DAV namespace MUST > NOT be used > > in > > > the request or response body of a versioning method unless that XML > > element > > > is explicitly defined in an IETF RFC." > > > > > > I think something similar needs to be added to the revision > to RFC2518. > > > > > > ------------------------------------------ > > Phone: 914-784-7569, ccjason@us.ibm.com > > >
Received on Saturday, 23 February 2002 04:40:10 UTC