- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Sun, 2 Feb 2003 21:54:16 +0100
- To: "Lisa Dusseault" <lisa@xythos.com>, "'Julian Reschke'" <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, "'Webdav WG'" <w3c-dist-auth@w3c.org>
> Previous conversation abridged: > > > > One of your proposals: > > > > 1) allow comma separated notation for tagged lists (to > > > > workaround proxy > > > > limitations) > > > > > > This completely breaks the syntax of the header for clients sending > > > requests to servers that don't immediately support 2518bis. Clients > > > wouldn't actually be able to use commas for years because there is > > > currently no way to see if a server supports 2518bis. I'm > > pointing this > > > out because if we decide to do this, we have to be clear on > > > understanding it's not going to be very useful for a long time. > > > > What you say is true and applies to *any* "new" feature in > > RFC2518bis -- > > therefore it makes sense to avoid them wherever possible > > (thus the proposal > > to use the If header instead of inventing a new header). > > I don't think my logic supports your conclusion. > > Adding commas to the If header is *exactly* as disruptive as inventing a > new header. Yes. However, we *already* have the desired behaviour (for the conditional operation). So this is something that is already supported by RFC2518, and we should use it. Clients can use it *now*. The *only* thing that's missing (and it's only a problem when there are misbehaving proxies in the communication path) is the change to allow comma separated lists. Whether we do *that* change is a completely separate issue. Julian -- <green/>bytes GmbH -- http://www.greenbytes.de -- tel:+492512807760
Received on Sunday, 2 February 2003 15:55:25 UTC