- From: Geoffrey M Clemm <geoffrey.clemm@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2003 08:10:48 -0400
- To: w3c-dist-auth@w3c.org
- Message-ID: <OFF1E3105C.5C14F114-ON85256D9B.000DF33A-85256D9B.0042E846@us.ibm.com>
I agree with Lisa's observations below, and my conclusion is that since the behavior of GET on a collection is not defined, the behavior of DAV:getlastmodified should not be defined, since the purpose of the Last-Modified header is to support caching of the GET request. So until 2518 defines server-independent behavior of GET on a collection 2518 should remain silent on DAV:getlastmodified on a collection. Cheers, Geoff w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org wrote on 09/05/2003 06:16:56 PM: > > This is a good point. I was thinking that the GET response to a directory > was likely only a > listing of its member files, and then Geoff's idea of getlastmodified would > fit this model. > However there are a number of other possibilities: > > - If the server includes information about a directory's members, that > could change. E.g. > File Name Size Last Modified > file1.txt 123k 8/1/2003 > file2.txt 124k 8/2/2003 > A server that did a listing like this in response to a GET ought to > change its directory's > getlastmodified value whenever the content changed. Obviously that might > include a PUT > operation to a child as well as the other operations listed. > > - If the server returns a file like "index.html" in response to a GET for a > directory, then > possibly the 'getlastmodified' property value for the directory should be > that of > the index.html file. > > How many HTTP/WebDAV clients are there out there that do caching/synch based > on the > Last-Modified header or the 'getlastmodified' property? I am guessing there > are quite > a few because from what I've seen clients can't rely on ETag support in > Web/WebDAV servers. > > Lisa > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org > > [mailto:w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Julian Reschke > > Sent: Friday, September 05, 2003 2:52 PM > > To: Nevermann, Dr., Peter; w3c-dist-auth@w3c.org > > Subject: RE: getlastmodified of collections > > > > > > > > > From: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org > > > [mailto:w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org]On > > > Behalf Of Nevermann, Dr., Peter > > > Sent: Friday, September 05, 2003 6:19 PM > > > To: 'w3c-dist-auth@w3c.org' > > > Subject: DAV:getlastmodified of collections > > > > > > > > > AFAIK, according to RFC2518, Section 13.7, the DAV:getlastmodified > > > property is not required to be defined for collections, but > > a server > > > MAY define it. Is that correct? > > > > Actually, it's not really required at all. A server should > > provide a DAV:getlastmodified property for any resource for > > which it actually would also provide the last-modified header > > upon GET. So a collection may have GETtable content (in which > > case DAV:getlastmodified should be present), and then also a > > server may not even have the last-modified date for a plain > > resource (for instance if it's clockless). > > > > > Then, probably the bindings of the collection are to be considered > > > part of the collection's state and it would make sense to set > > > DAV:getlastmodified whenever the bindings change: > > > > I agree although I have to point out that properties *also* > > are part of the state of a collection, and the current > > consensus seems to be that the last-modified date should not > > change when the content doesn't. So this is non-obvious. > > > > > - BIND, UNBIND (the coll identified by the req-URI) > > > - REBIND (the coll identified by the req-URI AND the 2nd involved > > > coll) > > > - PUT returning 201 (the containing collection) > > > - MKCOL (the containing collection) > > > - DELETE (the containing collection) > > > - LOCK creating a lock-null resource (the containing collection) > > > - VERSION-CONTROL on existing version (the containing workspace) > > > > Yes. > > > > > Sorry for such a basic question, but I didn't find it in the specs. > > > > No, it's good to ask these kinds of questions. > > > > Julian > > > > -- > > <green/>bytes GmbH -- http://www.greenbytes.de -- tel:+492512807760 > > > > > >
Received on Monday, 8 September 2003 08:10:56 UTC