- From: Lisa Dusseault <lisa@xythos.com>
- Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2003 12:35:18 -0700
- To: "Jason Crawford" <ccjason@us.ibm.com>, "'Webdav WG'" <w3c-dist-auth@w3c.org>
MKCOL_AND_302: This issue can be marked "inBis" if not CLOSED. Draft -03 says that MKCOL can return 302 and there have been no objections so far. IMPLIED_LWS: This issue can be marked "inBis" if not CLOSED. Draft -03 says that the HTTP rules are imported "including the rules about implied linear white-space." PUT_AND_INTERMEDIATE_COLLECTIONS: This issue can be marked "inBis" if not CLOSED. Draft -03 says "The server MUST NOT create those intermediate collections automatically.” INTEROP_DELETE_AND_MULTISTATUS: This is the old issue respecting how HTTP clients might be confused by a 207 response to a DELETE message, believing it to be a success message <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-dist-auth/1999AprJun/0062.html>. Have we got consensus to continue using 207, on the basis that by now it would break far more WebDAV clients to *stop* using 207? - Julian says continue using 207 but has also proposed switching to a 4XX <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-dist-auth/2003JanMar/0049.html> <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-dist-auth/2003JanMar/0065.html> - Roy argues it violates RFC2616 <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-dist-auth/2003JanMar/0046.html> - My vote is to continue using 207 <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-dist-auth/2003JanMar/0044.html> - The interim meeting attendees in Jan 2003 were unanimous in continuing with 207 <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-dist-auth/2003JanMar/0044.html> - John DeSoi points out that Netscape uses DELETE and 2XX should not be redefined <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-dist-auth/2003JanMar/0057.html> - Bob Denny says let's not violate RFC2616 <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-dist-auth/2003JanMar/0048.html> - Geoff Clemm might want to clarify his position <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-dist-auth/2003JanMar/0065.html> I don't think we have consensus yet overall. Please discuss, clarify, or even simply restate your position. Lisa
Received on Sunday, 22 June 2003 15:35:17 UTC