- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2002 21:16:46 +0200
- To: "Jim Luther" <luther.j@apple.com>, <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>
> From: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org > [mailto:w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Jim Luther > Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2002 9:01 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 10:20 AM, Clemm, Geoff wrote: > > > 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 :-). > > On Thursday, October 24, 2002, at 10:25 AM, Julian Reschke wrote: > > > WebDAV properties are identified using namespaces. Just do not add > > properties in namespaces you don't control. > > Surely I wouldn't do that (because I've read the RFC and understand how Jim, I didn't want to imply that it was you who did that. But obviously somebody else did :-) > to add non-standard properties to a namespace Apple owns -- for > example, http://www.apple.com/webdav_fs/props/). However, Apple had > already shipped products using non-standard properties in the DAV: > namespace before I had anything to do with WebDAV. > > I asked Lisa to revive the "Quota and Size Properties for DAV > Collections" draft because: > (a) I think quotas are useful and > (b) I knew that Apple had done the wrong thing by using quota and > quotaused in the DAV: namespace and I want to correct that problem as > quickly as possible. That's a good thing. > So... I'm asking forgiveness and asking that the new names don't > conflict with those Apple already uses. As I noted in an earlier > message, we fully plan to support the new properties as soon as it > looks like they are fully defined and won't change. > > By the way, you'll find the same problem with the non-standard > properties defined by Microsoft including DAV:ishidden which has been > recently discussed on this mailing list [1]. Yes. There are many more in use (or actually not in use, but appearing in PROPFIND requests) at Microsoft. But that shouldn't be an excuse to copy this behaviour. BTW: DAV:ishidden was documented in an Internet Draft that at some point wasn't updated and therefore expired. It probably was intended to be published as WG RFC at a later point of time. Lesson: do not use the DAV: namespace in Internet Drafts, unless they are WebDAV working group drafts (hint hint). [1] <http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/draft-hopmann-collection-props-00.txt> > ... Julian -- <green/>bytes GmbH -- http://www.greenbytes.de -- tel:+492512807760
Received on Thursday, 24 October 2002 15:17:19 UTC