Re: [Bug 3] Bindings draft should specify if all properties MUST have same value on all bindings

Jim Whitehead wrote:
> Let me suggest the following language. I think we all agree this is a
> minimum level statement on the issue -- where we differ is in how to go
> beyond this level (Julian wants to change the SHOULD to a MUST , while I'd
> like to add an additional MAY).
> 
> Proposed language:
> 
> Note that, consistent with [RFC2518], the value of a dead property is 
> independent of the number of bindings to its host resource or of the 
> path submitted to PROPFIND. Similarly consistent with [RFC2518], the
> value of a live property SHOULD be independent of the number of
> bindings to its host resource, and of the path submitted to PROPFIND.
> 
> The reason for the two almost-identical sentences is to address Julian's
> desire to not include spec. language that's obvious from a careful reading
> of 2518. I personally prefer the following, more compact construction:
> 
> Consistent with [RFC2518] the value of a dead property MUST be, and the
> value of a live property SHOULD be, independent of the number of bindings to
> its host resource or of the path submitted to PROPFIND.

I personally would prefer to stay silent about the topic, but if 
everybody else is agreeing, I'll be happy to add one of these 
(preferrably the latter, shorter one).

Feedback appreciated,

Julian

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

Received on Monday, 13 December 2004 22:09:55 UTC