- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2003 17:16:13 +0100
- To: "Lisa Dusseault" <lisa@xythos.com>, "'Julian Reschke'" <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, "'Webdav WG'" <w3c-dist-auth@w3c.org>
> From: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org > [mailto:w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Lisa Dusseault > Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2003 5:06 PM > To: 'Julian Reschke'; 'Webdav WG' > Subject: RE: response to comment ... > > > > > > Now, as then, WFS sets the display name to be the base name from the > > > path part of the URL. So for us resourcename is a property which is > > > constant as long as the resource's URL is constant, and > > changes when the > > > URL changes. I don't know if we'd change this if we did support > > > bindings. > > > > Well, I consider this a bug. It's not supported by the spec. > > I've always thought this was against the spirit of the WebDAV > specification. However, I don't think it can be considered a bug. > RFC2518 doesn't require displayname to have a particular value, or to be > writable, or to be empty. Correct. But it says that properties are on resources, not on URLs: "Properties are pieces of data that describe the state of a resource. Properties are data about data." > > The Webfolder client indeed displays the displayname instead of the last URI > > segment when present (and even uses in in the "href" column instead of the > > real URI). This works well when > > > > - the last part of the displayname consistently is identical > > to the last URI segment (mod. URI escaping) (IIS) > > Yeah, this is what WFS does, I believe we consciously mimicked IIS in > order to work well with Web Folders. > > > - DAV:displayname is just a dead property that most of the > > time isn't set (moddav) > > Do you know what happens when it is set to some value other than the > last URI segment? Does any client get confused when the URI ends in > "index.html" but the displayname shows "Index of files here"? Not that I'm aware of. > More interestingly, what happens if there are two resources in a > collection which have the same resourcename -- does this confuse the > client deeply? Not the (webfolder) client, but certainly the user :-) > > If we consider this an interop problem, we should deprecate DAV:displayname > > (because that's the only way to "fix" the webfolder client) and come up with > > a new property with the same semantics. > > That might be cool. Exchange 2000 uses a "subject" property across many > types of resources (emails, appointments, maybe even Office documents) > to serve as a truly user-displayable value or "friendly name". Its > value is not unique within a collection, so multiple emails in the same > folder can have the subject "RE: response to comment ...". And it is > writable, not protected, yet it is given a default value selected by the > server when the resource is created, so that a collection doesn't show a > lot of blank friendly names. OK. Maybe we should investigate that. Julian -- <green/>bytes GmbH -- http://www.greenbytes.de -- tel:+492512807760
Received on Wednesday, 5 March 2003 11:16:20 UTC