- From: John Reese <john.reese@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2004 15:23:01 -0800
- To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
Good afternoon, WebDAV wg. I have a question about the interpretation of RFC 2518 -- I hope this is the right place to post it. If there's a better list, please let me know, and I subjunctively would apologize for posting here. I'm implementing a DAV server for a commercial product that exposes its content through various protocols, of which DAV is only one. There is some concern that the DAV semantics for MOVE and COPY with the overwrite header set to T are too dangerious for our repository... if the destination is a collection, it may be dangerous to do the equivalent of a depth-infinity DELETE before the MOVE or COPY, as section 8.8.4 and 8.9.3 dictate, because resources within a collection may have additional metadata, like version histories and so forth, as well as the equivalent of dead properties (although they won't be exposed as such through our DAV server in the first release). So, I have two questions: 1. given that overwriting a collection can have repurcussions for dead properties and so forth in general, why are MOVE and COPY defined as deleting the collections instead of (for example) a recursive per-resource overwrite that would retain properties on corresponding resources and remove those resources that were not in the source folder? 2. would refusing to service MOVE or COPY requests, regardless of the value of the Overwrite header, when the destination is a non-null collection resource (responding, for example, with a 405 Method Not Allowed to such requests), be compliant with the RFC, or would it conflict with the rules in section 8.8.4 and 8.9.3? Thanks.
Received on Friday, 17 December 2004 23:23:32 UTC