Re: redirect references protocol: automatic update

I also think that the third option would be best.


Elias


Geoffrey M Clemm wrote:

>I prefer (3), a simple singe resource type, with the other information 
>moved into a set of properties.
>
>Cheers,
>Geoff
>
>Julian wrote on 01/09/2004 07:46:41 AM:
>
>  
>
>>Geoffrey M Clemm wrote:
>>    
>>
>>>One possibility is to have an additional argument to MKREDIRECTREF,
>>>e.g. DAV:stable, that means that the client forbids the server from
>>>auto-updating the reference.  A client that doesn't care would leave
>>>off this parameter, and the server would do what it wanted, while a
>>>client that cared would specify this parameter, and a server that 
>>>      
>>>
>doesn't
>  
>
>>>support stable redirectref's would fail the request.
>>>      
>>>
>>Yep.
>>
>>The thing I'm currently unsure about is how to model the different 
>>properties of a link (stability, response status). Several approaches 
>>come to mind:
>>
>>1) different resource types (redirect-301, redirect-302, ...)
>>
>>2) one resource type with extension elements, such as
>>
>>   <redirect-ref><status301/><stable/></redirect-ref>
>>
>>3) one simple resource type with the remaining information moved into 
>>separate properties (like it was proposed for the status).
>>
>>Regards, Julian
>>
>>-- 
>><green/>bytes GmbH -- http://www.greenbytes.de -- tel:+492512807760
>>
>>    
>>