- From: Jim Whitehead <ejw@cs.ucsc.edu>
- Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 11:27:45 -0800
- To: "'WebDAV \(WebDAV WG\)'" <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>
> Which of the open issues below can be closed now? > > <http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/draft-ietf-webdav-bind-lates > t.html#rfc.issue.2.3_copy_depth_infinity> This can be closed. > <http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/draft-ietf-webdav-bind-lates > t.html#rfc.issue.2.3_copy_vs_loops> This can be closed. > <http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/draft-ietf-webdav-bind-lates > t.html#rfc.issue.2.3_copy_example> I'm still not 100% sure what cases this is intended to cover. My interpretation is that it covers (a) the target of a loopback binding, as well as (b) the case where there are multiple bindings to the same resource. We currently have an example for (a) and not (b). I'd like to see the following example added to address this shortcoming. Given the following collection hierarchy: +------------------+ | Root Collection | | bindings: | | CollX +------------------+ | | | +----------------+ | Collection C1 | | bindings: | | x.gif y.gif | +----------------+ | | | | +-------------+ | Resource R1 | +-------------+ A COPY of /CollX with Depth infinity to /CollY results in the following collection hierarchy: +------------------+ | Root Collection | | bindings: | | CollX CollY | +------------------+ | \ | \ | \ +----------------+ +-----------------+ | Collection C1 | | Collection C2 | | bindings: | | bindings: | | x.gif y.gif | | x.gif y.gif | +----------------+ +-----------------+ | | | | | | | | +-------------+ +-------------+ | Resource R1 | | Resource R2 | +-------------+ +-------------+ Assuming that those are the only two cases intended to be covered, the addition of this example would close this issue. - Jim
Received on Thursday, 2 December 2004 19:29:37 UTC