- From: Stefan Eissing <stefan.eissing@greenbytes.de>
- Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2002 10:47:41 +0200
- To: "Julian Reschke" <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Cc: "Lisa Dusseault" <lisa@xythos.com>, <w3c-dist-auth@w3c.org>
I think it is a new model that multiple quotas apply to the current user for a single resource. If I understood you wrong and you want to report all quotas for all users, well, I think that can be: - a very long list - not desirable for security/privacy reasons. //Stefan Am Freitag, 25.10.02, um 10:41 Uhr (Europe/Berlin) schrieb Julian Reschke: >> From: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org >> [mailto:w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Stefan Eissing >> Sent: Friday, October 25, 2002 10:31 AM >> To: Julian Reschke >> Cc: Lisa Dusseault; w3c-dist-auth@w3c.org >> Subject: Re: FW: I-D ACTION:draft-dusseault-dav-quota-01.txt >> >> >> >> I think it's not a good idea to report information about >> "all" quota spaces in a resource: > > So do I. > >> - the resource might not know all quotas on the server >> - you need additional information which quota applies to the >> current resource > > The intent off my proposal to report exactly the quotas that *do* > apply to > the resource. > >> Since the reported set is likely to be incomplete (and or expensive >> to compute), I think only one quote should be reported. > > If it only contains the applicable quotas, it shouldn't be harder to > compute > than a single quota. > >> However, I do think that there is benefit in having one quota-xxx >> property which has a XML structured value. That makes it easy to >> extend in the future. >> >> //Stefan >> >> Am Donnerstag, 24.10.02, um 20:35 Uhr (Europe/Berlin) schrieb Julian >> Reschke: >> >>> >>>> From: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org >>>> [mailto:w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Lisa Dusseault >>>> Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2002 8:22 PM >>>> To: 'Julian Reschke'; w3c-dist-auth@w3c.org >>>> Subject: RE: FW: I-D ACTION:draft-dusseault-dav-quota-01.txt >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Why do you think this is preferable for the client? Why not keep >>> >>> It allows marshalling of multiple quota constraints (and we know that >>> there >>> may be more than one). >>> >>>> single-property, single-value? This complicates things even for the >>>> server. >>> >>> Why? For a server that enforces only a single constraint, it's just a >>> few >>> more XML tags to add. Where's the problem? >>> >>> Confused, >>> >>> Julian >>> >>> -- >>> <green/>bytes GmbH -- http://www.greenbytes.de -- tel:+492512807760 >>> >>> >> >> > > > > -- > <green/>bytes GmbH -- http://www.greenbytes.de -- tel:+492512807760 >
Received on Friday, 25 October 2002 04:48:15 UTC