- From: Evert | Rooftop <evert@rooftopsolutions.nl>
- Date: Sun, 4 Oct 2009 02:15:15 +0200
- To: WebDAV <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>
Dear list, I'm implementing RFC3744. However, the required privileges for COPY don't make a lot of sense to me. (Referencing Appendix B). If I'm doing a COPY and the target already exists, the write-content and write-properties privileges are required for the target resource. This is contrasting with MOVE, where the requirements for the target collection is unbind/bind. RFC4918 (section 9.8.4) states the following: When a collection is overwritten, the membership of the destination collection after the successful COPY request MUST be the same membership as the source collection immediately before the COPY. Thus, merging the membership of the source and destination collections together in the destination is not a compliant behavior. In general, if clients require the state of the destination URL to be wiped out prior to a COPY (e.g., to force live properties to be reset), then the client could send a DELETE to the destination before the COPY request to ensure this reset. (end copy-paste). If I'm copying a non-collection resource to overwrite another non- collection resource, this behaviour makes total sense to me. However, when I'm dealing with collections on either the source or the target, I'm deleting the target resource before doing the copy (which I feel is quite sensible). So from the perspective of RFC3744, I feel the spec makes the assumption COPY is just dealing with non-collections. Do I have the liberty to treat COPY privileges similar to MOVE? Either way this will probably be the route I will be taking, but clarification is appreciated. Evert
Received on Sunday, 4 October 2009 00:15:55 UTC