W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-dist-auth@w3.org > July to September 2005

Re: Support for non-DAV collections

From: Lisa Dusseault <lisa@osafoundation.org>
Date: Sat, 09 Jul 2005 08:41:15 -0700
To: "Julian Reschke" <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Cc: "Webdav WG" <w3c-dist-auth@w3c.org>
Message-ID: <op.stnki1ureochem@lisa.local>

It depends on whether we're going for Draft Standard or not -- and it was  
my understanding that Ted is keeping the WG open so we can bring WebDAV to  
Draft Standard.  To go to Draft Standard, we need to take a Proposed  
Standard and remove the options that aren't implemented, interoperable and  
tested 2x2.

Another option that isn't broadly implemented, if at all, is the support  
for locks that aren't write locks or aren't exclusive locks (since only  
exclusive write locks are fully defined).  Are there any implementations  
at all that do locks that aren't write locks?  Didn't Adobe or somebody  
implement shared locks?


On Sat, 09 Jul 2005 00:18:50 -0700, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>  

> Lisa Dusseault wrote:
>>   Speaking of RFC2518bis, do we have any support for this option in  
>> any  WebDAV implementations?  I don't recall it being tested in past  
>> interops...
>>  "   A resource MAY be a collection but not be WebDAV compliant.  That  
>> is,
>>    the resource may comply with all the rules set out in this
>>    specification regarding how a collection is to behave without
>>    necessarily supporting all methods that a WebDAV compliant resource
>>    is required to support.  In such a case the resource may return the
>>    DAV:resourcetype property with the value DAV:collection but MUST NOT
>>    return a DAV header containing the value "1" on an OPTIONS response."
>>  If this option isn't implemented or isn't interoperable, let's cut it.
> As far as I can tell, there's no reason to cut it. It doesn't make the  
> protocol harder to implement, and it may be of value for some servers  
> that choose to implement a subset of WebDAV only (GroupDAV comes to  
> mind).
> Best regards, Julian
Received on Saturday, 9 July 2005 15:41:41 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:01:34 UTC