Re: remaining redirect ref issues

Geoffrey M Clemm wrote:

> 
> WRT to the open redirect issues:
> 
> Julian wrote on 11/06/2003 06:57:53 AM:

...

>  > - finish the synchronization between RFC2518bis and the redirect ref
>  > spec on how PROPFIND should behave when a collection contains redirect
>  > references
> 
> Are there issues here, or is this just editorial?

I'd say almost editorial. However it would be welcome if someone who was 
part of the WG during the '2000 last call could make suggestions for 
replacement text (or alternatively state why we don't need to make a 
change).

>  > - almost all other issues are editorial or about terminology --
>  > proposals how to resolve these (replacement text!) are welcome
> 
> Probably the best thing here is to start a thread on these issues,
> along with your current proposed solution, so we can bring them to
> closure.
> 
>  > Another issue that's not listed yer:
>  >
>  > - COPY applied to a collection containing redirect refs currently is
>  > specified not to copy the redirects (unless the client explicitly
>  > specifies that using "Apply-To-Redirect-Ref"). Thus, non-redirect-ref
>  > aware clients will always get a 207 (that is, only a partial success)
>  > when attempting the COPY. We should consider allowing he COPY to succeed
>  > if the server is able to recreate an equivalent redirect reference at
>  > the target.
> 
> I agree.  We should just state this.

OK, so we'll say that if a non-referencing-protocol aware client issues 
a COPY, the redirect references should be copied as well (instead of 
leaving them out and producing 302 status entries in the multistatus).

Julian


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

Received on Thursday, 6 November 2003 07:40:35 UTC