- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2003 23:16:20 +0200
- To: <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>
> From: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org]On > Behalf Of Elias Sinderson > Sent: Wednesday, July 30, 2003 10:48 PM > To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org > Subject: Re: rfc2518-bis-04 issues (part 1) > > > Comments inlined below... > > Cheers, > Elias > > > ... > > My feeling is that while a server is allowed to rewrite XML as long as it > preserves the semantics, dropping namespace prefixes is likely to cause > problems. For example: > > Storing > <Foo:bar> > </Foo:bar> > as > <Foo:bar/> > to save space is perfectly fine, while storing the above as > <bar/> > is not. The issue at hand is that namespaces serve to qualify the semantic > interpretation of a given XML element, hence dropping that > qualification can > only lead to interoperability problems between clients which respect or, > alternately, expect namespaces. Without the namespace qualifier, a client > may not be able to know what is meant by an element. I would be happy to > construct a more meaningful example to illustrate this, but I > hope the above > is sufficient. This is an important issue that we need to reach a > concensus > on. It get's worse. Consider <D:prop xmlns:E="whatever" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:xs="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema"><E:foo><E:bar xsi:type="xs:boolean">true</E:bar></D:prop> Not storing the namespace mapping for "xs" will simply break the content, even if the prefix isn't used for any child element. > ... > > > 03-C17: > > > > 8.1.5.: "Because clients may be forced to prompt users or throw away > changed > > content if the ETag changes, a WebDAV server MUST not change > the ETag (or > > getlastmodified value) for a resource when only its property values > change." > > > > Some servers do, and I don't think we can change that. Therefore I think > > this change at least needs explicit consensus on the mailing list. > > I vote for the wording that is in there. I think we've already reached > consensus that changing property values should not be changing etags. Where and when? > I also believe that there was already concensus re: property values not > affecting ETags... Since doing a PUT of a resource doesn't affect > properties > and a GET doesn't retrieve properties, the ETag should not change when > properties on a resource do. That is to say that ETags should only be That's simply not true. You're argueing from a world view where the server stores properties and content as separate entities. However, it's perfectly legal to have a server that - extracts some properties upon PUT (for instance metadata from a WORD document) and/or - changes the content upon PROPPATCH of one of the aforementioned properties. I think that we can't and shouldn't make this behaviour illegal. > modified when the enitity, itself, is modified (hence the name > entity tag). > We may want to consider, however, introducing an equivalent > property tag, or > PTag, which could be used to determine if properties on a given resource > have changed. An argument with a (set of) use case(s) would have to be > developed to make this a compelling idea. Yes, but that's a separate discussion. Julian -- <green/>bytes GmbH -- http://www.greenbytes.de -- tel:+492512807760
Received on Wednesday, 30 July 2003 17:16:59 UTC