- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2003 22:18:52 +0200
- To: <dennis.hamilton@acm.org>, "Stanley Guan" <stanley.guan@oracle.com>, <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>
> From: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org > [mailto:w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Dennis E. Hamilton > Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 10:02 PM > To: Julian Reschke; Stanley Guan; w3c-dist-auth@w3.org > Subject: RE: DAV Schema Assessment (was Re: rfc2518bis DAV DTD ...) > > > > Julian, > > With regard to schema-definition maintenance, I was referring > only to extension to the DAV: namespace, not the occurrence of ad > hoc elements from other namespaces. OK, yes, you can define a Schema that knows about all presently defined DAV elements. If you combine that with lax validation for non-DAV elements, and also take care of all other issues (such as ordering), you may be able to use that for validation. However, this validation immediately breaks once a new DAV protocol element is added. Thus, you can't use that Schema to validate messages in a production system that is meant to accept messages with not-yet defined extensions. > ... > > The only case that a reference XML schema definition for DAV > would need to be maintained is with regard to the first part. > The second case is up to the people who define/use ad hoc > additions. [Because there is no 100%, I see no reason to settle > for 0%. It's not a binary question for me.] Well, the validation process MUST accept all messages that are legal according to the spec. If it doesn't, what's the point in using it (unless just for debugging/education reasons)? > Does that fit your understanding of DAV extensibility? > > If you're telling me that anyone can invent an element and > DAV-validly introduce it as if under the DAV namespace, I will The WG says it's not allowed, but many companies do it. That's a fact we can't change in practice. > quietly pick up my marbles and go figure out how to use SOAP > (with attachments) and the Web Services stack on HTTP to do > Document Authoring and Versioning on the web. (Such an expression > of some level of DAV functionality is probably valuable anyway.) I'm not sure I follow. The way WebDAV is extensible IMHO doesn't cause any actual problems. Please be more specific. And before promoting SOAP in a HTTP-based WG, please make sure that you've read all related HTTP-with-extensions-vs-SOAP propaganda :-) Julian -- <green/>bytes GmbH -- http://www.greenbytes.de -- tel:+492512807760
Received on Thursday, 16 October 2003 16:19:19 UTC