RE: another thought on "is element order significant" vs DTDs in WebDAV

I support the former as well (order is irrelevant unless explicitly
stated otherwise).

Cheers,
Geoff

w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org wrote on 08/11/2003 01:42:49 PM:

> 
> I just noticed that the specification for PROPPATCH says that property
> changes MUST be applied in order.  So clearly there are already some 
cases
> in WebDAV in which XML order of elements is significant. 
> 
> I still think it's a good idea to say at a minimum that the order of
> resources and properties in a PROPFIND response is irrelevant.  So 
should we
> say that in general order is irrelevant but the PROPPATCH request body 
is an
> exception?  Or should we say that in general order is important but the
> PROPFIND response body is an exception?
> 
> I favour the first - the general rule being that order is irrelevant 
unless
> specified as relevant. 
> 
> Lisa
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org 
> > [mailto:w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Lisa Dusseault
> > Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2003 9:45 AM
> > To: 'Julian Reschke'; w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
> > Subject: RE: another thought on "is element order 
> > significant" vs DTDs in WebDAV
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > I agree.  I'll add a further reason, which is that it's more 
> > important for servers, which handle 1000s of clients, to be 
> > able to stream data out in the order most quickly obtainable, 
> > to maximize server performance.
> > 
> > Lisa
> > 
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org
> > > [mailto:w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Julian Reschke
> > > Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2003 6:04 AM
> > > To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
> > > Subject: another thought on "is element order significant" vs 
> > > DTDs in WebDAV
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Hi,
> > > 
> > > here are a few reasons why I think WebDAV should say that
> > > element ordering is irrelevant:
> > > 
> > > 1) There are already existing well-deployed servers (in this
> > > case IIS) that get the ordering wrong (here: propstat 
> > > content), thus clients can't rely on ordering anyway for all 
> > > practical purposes,
> > > 
> > > 2) Requiring a specific ordering will make protocol
> > > extensions extremely hard. For instance, take two independant 
> > > extensions "A" and "B" that extend RFC2518 and add new 
> > > elements to the same container element. If at a later point a 
> > > new protocol revision  tries to integrate both extensions, it 
> > > will be hard to come up with a simple DTD that consolidates 
> > > both changes.
> > > 
> > > Julian
> > > 
> > > --
> > > <green/>bytes GmbH -- http://www.greenbytes.de -- tel:+492512807760
> > > 
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
>

Received on Monday, 11 August 2003 13:48:25 UTC