- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2003 10:45:20 +0100
- To: "Stefan Eissing" <stefan.eissing@greenbytes.de>, "Julian Reschke" <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Cc: "Clemm, Geoff" <gclemm@rational.com>, "WebDAV" <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>
> From: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org > [mailto:w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Stefan Eissing > Sent: Friday, March 07, 2003 10:34 AM > To: Julian Reschke > Cc: Clemm, Geoff; WebDAV > Subject: Re: bind draft issues > > ... > > >> Hmm, I think I know what you mean, however there are cases > >> where you might want this to break: > >> > >> 1) variants. /news/english/ and /news/german/ might be the same > >> resource with different content based on the "access" URL. All > >> get* properties will probably vary. (They can already vary on > >> a resource with a single binding) > > > > That would mean that entities may vary based on the request URI. Is > > this the > > case? > > I thought that's what I wrote. OK, I rephrase it: that would mean that a resource is *allowed* to vary based on the request URL. I don't think we all agree on that. > >> 2) live props with URI References can report different relative uri > >> references. They are semantically equivalent, but the string value > >> of such a property will differ. > > > > For instance? > > ../../../../version-history/1/2/12 > for PROPFIND result on /a/b/c/d/vcr > and > ../../../version-history/1/2/12 > for PROPFIND result on /a/b/c/vcr > with both "vcr" being bindings to the same resource. OK, this means that we'll have to clarify the "sameness" of property values. If a property value is a relative URI, it's to be resolved against the request URL. If they resolve to the same absoluteURI, the property value is the same. RFC2518bis issue: the spec normatively refers to RFC2616's term "URI", but RFC2616 does not formally define it. We need to rephrase this using the BNF terms URIreference and absoluteURI. > >> What exactly is it, you want to prevent to happen? > > > > People falling into the trap of believing in "URL properties", I guess. > > Probably a good guess of Geoff's intentions. Why not give a guess > what an "URL property" exactly is? That would be most welcome. Our (Geoff's any my) understanding is that there *are* no URL properties. A URL property would be something that varies with the request URL (under the relaxed "sameness" definition stated above). Julian -- <green/>bytes GmbH -- http://www.greenbytes.de -- tel:+492512807760
Received on Friday, 7 March 2003 04:46:33 UTC