- From: Lisa Dusseault <lisa@osafoundation.org>
- Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2004 11:33:57 -0700
- To: Geoffrey M Clemm <geoffrey.clemm@us.ibm.com>
- Cc: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, w3c-dist-auth@w3.org, www-webdav-dasl@w3.org, w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org
I also think it's a good idea. Again, the draft could specify what the server MUST support, depending on what standards it has implemented. E.g. if the server has implemented both DeltaV and property data types, MUST it return whatever data typing information it has in REPORT responses? Lisa On Sep 15, 2004, at 10:16 AM, Geoffrey M Clemm wrote: > That's fine with me. > > Cheers, > Geoff > > > Julian wrote on 09/15/2004 10:38:37 AM: > >> >> OK, >> >> here's an issue I'd like to fix in the draft ([1]): >> >> the current text speaks about PROPFIND, but what it *really* should be >> saying that this change applies to all methods that return >> RFC2518-style > >> multistatus response bodies (such as REPORT/DAV:expand-property, >> defined > >> in RFC3253, or SEARCH). >> >> Proposal: add a new section (6) "Changes for other methods", >> specifying >> this (this will also add an informative reference to RFC3253 if we >> mention REPORT). >> >> Feedback appreciated, Julian >> >> >> [1] >> <http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/draft-reschke-webdav-property- >> datatypes-latest.html#rfc.issue.other-method-semantics> >> >> -- >> <green/>bytes GmbH -- http://www.greenbytes.de -- tel:+492512807760 >>
Received on Wednesday, 15 September 2004 18:34:28 UTC