RE: FW: I-D ACTION:draft-dusseault-dav-quota-01.txt

Apple's existing properties should not conflict with DAV:quota or
DAV:quotaused, since they shouldn't be in the DAV: namespace (surely Apple
would not have defined non-standard properties in the DAV: namespace :-).
 
Cheers,
Geoff 

-----Original Message-----
From: Jim Luther [mailto:luther.j@apple.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2002 12:43 PM
To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
Subject: Re: FW: I-D ACTION:draft-dusseault-dav-quota-01.txt



On Thursday, October 24, 2002, at 09:23 AM, Clemm, Geoff wrote: 


There is a 

separate question of whether the units should to appear in the 

property name ... I'd probably leave it off, for uniformity with 

the rest of HTTP (it is the "Length" header, not the "Octet-Length" 

header). 


I like having the unit type in the name because it makes the purpose of the
property more self-described. 


However, I'm not opposed to removing the unit types from the new property
names as long the property names are NOT quota and quotaused -- using quota
and quotaused would break Apple's existing server and client
implementations. Existing Mac OS X clients use quota and quotaused and
expect the unit size to be 512-bytes and that's what the Apple iDisk server
returns for quota and quotaused. 


- Jim