- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2005 21:31:59 +0100
- To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
Hi, below is my updated issues list... Best regards, Julian -- snip -- Issues with draft-ietf-webdav-quota-06.txt Content 01-C03 quota vs disk space <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-dist-auth/2003JanMar/0439.html> <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-dist-auth/2003JanMar/0460.html> <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-dist-auth/2003OctDec/0184.html> <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-dist-auth/2003OctDec/0193.html> The spec says that servers may expose physical disk limits as quota. a) This is incompatible with NFS from which we're borrowing the semantics (it treats disk limits as a separate property, and so should we) Update -04: this still appears in the text, but is less critical now that authorability of the quota is gone. I'd still like to see the working group make an explicit decision to keep this, because it's IMHO clearly outside the scope of this spec (I'd prefer separate properties). 04-C07, section 3, DAV:quota-available-bytes <http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/draft-ietf-webdav-quota-05.html#rfc.section.3> "Support for this property is REQUIRED on collections, and OPTIONAL on other resources. A server SHOULD implement this property for each resource that has the DAV:quota-used-bytes property." What's the motivation for the distinction? (same in section 4) 04-C11, section 7 "The total size of a collection, DAV:quota-used-bytes, is not necessarily a sum of the DAV:getcontentlength properties for resources stored in the collection." Actually, it won't be in most cases I'm aware of. Please either rephrase it (so this doesn't sound like an edge case) or drop the point. Update -06: It's now saying "The total size of a collection, DAV:quota-used-bytes, may not be a sum of the DAV:getcontentlength properties for resources stored in the collection." ...which isn't that different... 05-C02, Section 4 <http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/draft-ietf-webdav-quota-05.html#rfc.section.4> I think this property is "computed" (as defined in RFC3253), and the spec should say so. 05-E01, section 1.2 <http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/draft-ietf-webdav-quota-05.html#rfc.section.1.2> I'd move those parts that "import" terminology from RFC2518/3253 into a separate subsection ("Terminology"), and also refer to the def of "computed" property (I think we need that later).
Received on Thursday, 10 February 2005 20:32:37 UTC