W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-dist-auth@w3.org > July to September 2004

Re: Request for feedback: WebDAV property datatype draft

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2004 23:05:24 +0200
Message-ID: <41475D14.6000303@gmx.de>
To: Lisa Dusseault <lisa@osafoundation.org>
CC: Bernard Desruisseaux <bernard.desruisseaux@oracle.com>, webdav <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>

Lisa Dusseault wrote:
> I have a nit on the draft: the example shows a boolean value of '1' in  
> section 5.1, but the text below says this is a value of 'true'.

The *typed* value is the same. Both "1" and "true" are legal 
serializations of the XML Schema datatype "boolean".

> More globally, some issues:
>  - I had some understanding from previous discussions that this was  
> supposed to allow multi-valued properties.  However, it appears that  
> the entire property value must be provided in each PROPPATCH request.   
> It would be helpful if the specification communicated this.

Well, the spec doesn't change basic PROPPATCH semantics (and it never 
was claimed it does). Does it really need to state that it doesn't? Why?

>  - I'm a little concerned that the multi-valued stuff is in an  
> appendix.  If this functionality MUST be supported (by servers that  
> support the draft) then the examples should be in the main text, so  
> that server implementors aren't tempted not to support it.

No, it's an appendix because it's entirely optional. All that the spec 
defines is how you can use the xsi:type attribute from XML Schema to 
forward type information. It doesn't mandate support for any specific types.

>  - The draft should make more explicit requirements on server  
> implementors, to help ensure more interoperable and consistent  
> implementations.  For example, the draft should say something along the  
> lines of "Servers supporting this feature MUST support the following  
> list of data types and the array data type... [etc] "

See above, they don't have to. Is there any hope that we can get a 
consensus of a minimum set?  I guess it wouldn't contain more than 
strings, dates and integers (I wouldn't even expect boolean support from 

>  - Should there be a way for clients to detect whether the server  
> supports this feature?  I would think that would be better.  However,  

The client can detect that by looking at PROPFIND and PROPPATCH responses.

> if there's no way, then there should be some guidance for clients along  
> the lines of "If the client supports this draft, the client SHOULD send  
> data typing information for all non-string data types, without even  
> knowing whether the server supports the feature."

Section 6 
states that it's harmless to provide data type information upon 
PROPPATCH. Is there any need to expand this?


<green/>bytes GmbH -- http://www.greenbytes.de -- tel:+492512807760
Received on Tuesday, 14 September 2004 21:06:06 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:01:32 UTC