Re: draft-reschke-webdav-search-05 - a few questions on the draft

Wallmer, Martin wrote:

> of course multiple scopes give additional possibilites. But we should 
> keep DASL lightweight. Do you have a usecase for multiple scopes?
>
There are the obvious use cases in querying different parts of the 
srever namespace that could be handled (albeit less efficiently) with 
multiple SEARCH requests, each having a different scope. It would be 
left to the client, of course, to order these seperate responses if 
needed. The other things I thought of would require an much more 
extended grammar than basicsearch is right now. As is, DASL basicsearch 
is lightweight, useful and extensible - properties that are difficult to 
balance in protocol design. In light of this, I tend to agree with 
Martin that the current mechanisms are best left as is without both 
compelling usecases and clear specification/implementation paths for any 
proposed changes.


Cheers,
Elias