- From: Elias Sinderson <elias@soe.ucsc.edu>
- Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2006 13:56:43 -0800
- To: Geoffrey M Clemm <geoffrey.clemm@us.ibm.com>
- CC: Jason Crawford <nn683849@smallcue.com>, webdav <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>
Geoffrey M Clemm wrote: > > OK, how about the following: (version 3, I believe :-) > > Although commonly a mapping consists of a single segment and a > resource, > in general, a mapping consists of a set of segments and a resource. > This allows a server to treat a set of segments as equivalent > (i.e. either all of the segments are mapped to the same resource, > or none of the segments are mapped to a resource). > For example, a server that performs case-folding on segments > will treat the segments "ab", "Ab", "aB", and "AB" as equivalent, > A client can then use any of these segments to identify the resource. > Note that a PROPFIND result will select one of these equivalent > segments to identify the mapping, so there will be one PROPFIND > response element per mapping, not one per segment in the mapping. This seems the best version yet and I have no reservations about adopting the above text. Cheers, Elias
Received on Monday, 20 February 2006 21:57:01 UTC