Re: Comments on the "new" 2518--Display Name

Geoffrey M Clemm wrote:
> 
> +1 from me as well.  I believe Kevin's paragraph addresses the key
> confusions around DAV:displayname.
> 
> Cheers,
> Geoff

OK, I have opened an issue for proposed changes to DAV:displayname, see 
<http://ietf.cse.ucsc.edu:8080/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=236>.

The proposed changes are:

Section 15.2., para. 6:
OLD:

     Description:   The DAV:displayname property should be defined on all
       DAV compliant resources.  If present, the property contains a
       description of the resource that is suitable for presentation to a
       user.  This property is defined on the resource, and hence SHOULD
       have the same value independent of the Request-URI used to
       retrieve it (thus computing this property based on the Request-URI
       is deprecated).

NEW:

     Description:   The property contains a description of the resource
       that is suitable for presentation to a user.  This property is
       defined on the resource, and hence SHOULD have the same value
       independent of the Request-URI used to retrieve it (thus computing
       this property based on the Request-URI is deprecated).

       Servers and clients must understand that the method for
       identifying resources is still the URL.  While generic clients
       will be able to display DAV:displayname to end users, both sides
       of the protocol must understand that if users are allowed to
       perform operations such as rename, move, copy etc, generic clients
       must display the URLs (or the path segments used in the displayed
       collection) to allow these operations.  Changes to DAV:displayname
       do not issue moves or copies to the server, but simply change a
       piece of meta-data on the individual resource.


1) Take out the statement "The DAV:displayname property should be 
defined on all DAV compliant resources." - that doesn't make any sense 
at all. If a server doesn't know a good displayname, it shouldn't return 
one.

2) Incorporate text based on Kevin's suggestion.

Best regards, Julian

Received on Sunday, 19 March 2006 20:46:01 UTC