- From: Cyrus Daboo <cyrus@daboo.name>
- Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2007 09:40:56 -0400
- To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- cc: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
Hi Julian, --On April 27, 2007 8:57:02 AM +0200 Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote: >> The RCF3253 issues list should have a related entry, pointing out that >> rfc3253bis should make these live properties as well. Unfortunately, >> www.webdav.org is down right now (again). > > See > <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/ietf-dav-versioning/2002JulSep/0003. > html> and > <http://www.webdav.org/deltav/protocol/rfc3253-issues-list.htm>, Item > "5.5_USE_PROPERTIES". This does beg the question about when it is appropriate to use OPTIONS vs properties. Obviously you need to at least have a DAV header in OPTIONS so a client knows it is dealing with a DAV server, but beyond that, why have anything in OPTIONS when they could be a property? For example, why do we need the DASL header in OPTIONS in WebDAV SEARCH? Why can't that be a property? Sorry Julian, I had to bring that one up :-) There has also been some debate in the CalDAV arena about a more general server "capabilities" option. Basically some why (via a property) for a server to be very specific about what it supports - in particular for any SHOULD or MAY features in a spec. -- Cyrus Daboo
Received on Friday, 27 April 2007 13:41:16 UTC