rfc2518-bis-05 issues (part 2)

Hi.

Below is a list of issues I raised against drafts 02, 03 and 04 which 
IMHO have not been adequately addressed in the latest draft (see [1] for 
the original message).

C02-10) Section 8.2.2

(...)

Also: the example for propfind/allprop is missing. Why was it removed?



C02-14)  Section 8.11, The Effect of Locks on Properties and Collections

"This means that if a collection is locked, its lock-token is required 
in all these cases:
-	DELETE a collection's direct  internal member
-	MOVE a member out of the collection
-	MOVE a member into the collection, unless it overwrites a pre-existing 
member"

I think the latter is not really consistent with RFC3253.

[In general I'd like to have the latest GULP as normative appendix, and 
remove some of the prose about lock behaviour from the various sections; 
I think this is also we agreed upon in January]



C02-18) Section 9.1

I'd like to see the rational for the "extend" production.


C02-24) Section 12.1

Proposal: add an example.

Update -05: thanks for adding the location extension element. We may 
want to also say that it should only be used when the status for the 
response is 3xx.



E02-01) Editorial note

I think that removing the section numbers from the 3rd-level section 
names is a bad idea.




[1] <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-dist-auth/2003JulSep/0041.html>

-- 
<green/>bytes GmbH -- http://www.greenbytes.de -- tel:+492512807760

Received on Wednesday, 29 October 2003 06:07:12 UTC