- From: Jim Whitehead <ejw@ics.uci.edu>
- Date: Thu, 24 Jun 1999 13:39:58 -0700
- To: "'DASL'" <www-webdav-dasl@w3.org>
> I think of the search arbiter as just some code we want to execute > to do a query on some set of resources. I would not like to see a > search arbiter resource be required to be more complicated than that. > I think search arbiters should only be required to support the SEARCH > method. > I would not object to putting words to this effect into the > protocol spec., > even > though the absence of any further mention of methods implies that > that is in fact the case as it stands. I think it makes sense for a search arbiter to have properties, but no state associated with a GET response (i.e., GET should not work on a search arbiter). I think the search arbiter should support properties so it can participate in access control (most access control protocol proposals have employed properties in some way), and also so this extension mechanism is available in the future. It might be reasonable to forbid dead properties on a search arbiter, but this strikes me as being arbitrary. - Jim
Received on Thursday, 24 June 1999 16:43:23 UTC