- From: yamuna prakash <yamunap@hotmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 10 Oct 2003 19:24:04 +0000
- To: julian.reschke@gmx.de, www-webdav-dasl@w3.org
Yes. prakash >From: "Julian Reschke" <julian.reschke@gmx.de> >To: "yamuna prakash" <yamunap@hotmail.com>, ><julian.reschke@gmx.de>,<www-webdav-dasl@w3.org> >Subject: RE: draft-reschke-webdav-search-05 - a few questions on the draft >Date: Fri, 10 Oct 2003 09:19:43 +0200 > > >OK, > >so do we have agreement for > >- allowing multiple scopes in DAV:basicsearch and >- requiring servers that do not support multiple scopes to detect this and >reject the request? > >Julian > >-- ><green/>bytes GmbH -- http://www.greenbytes.de -- tel:+492512807760 > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: yamuna prakash [mailto:yamunap@hotmail.com] > > Sent: Thursday, October 09, 2003 11:02 PM > > To: julian.reschke@gmx.de; www-webdav-dasl@w3.org > > Subject: RE: draft-reschke-webdav-search-05 - a few questions on the > > draft > > > > > > Agreed. I think it would be beneficial to make it optional rather than > > preculde it totally. > > > > The other maybe goes into the nice to have list :) > > > > prakash > > > > >From: "Julian Reschke" <julian.reschke@gmx.de> > > >To: "yamuna prakash" <yamunap@hotmail.com>, > > ><julian.reschke@gmx.de>,<www-webdav-dasl@w3.org> > > >Subject: RE: draft-reschke-webdav-search-05 - a few questions on > > the draft > > >Date: Thu, 9 Oct 2003 13:24:45 +0200 > > > > > > > > > > From: www-webdav-dasl-request@w3.org > > > > [mailto:www-webdav-dasl-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of yamuna prakash > > > > Sent: Thursday, October 09, 2003 12:02 PM > > > > To: julian.reschke@gmx.de; www-webdav-dasl@w3.org > > > > Subject: RE: draft-reschke-webdav-search-05 - a few questions on the > > > > draft > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From my perspective the behavior should be identical as to what > > > > is defined > > > > for single scope i.e. I believe all the other aspects of a search > > >request > > > > (select, where, orderby, etc) should behave the way they have > > > > been defined > > > > for single scope. > > > > > > > > However I can see scenarios wherein it would definitely be > > useful if the > > > > user can specify the ability to group results by scope. > > > > .. > > > > > >See, > > > > > >this is exactly why we are so reluctant to add new things. > > Frequently, they > > >turn out to be not as simple as suggested. > > > > > >So I'd propose either to make the minimal change I suggested (allowing > > >multiple scopes (optional), and defining a condition code for > > servers that > > >don't support that), or not to put it into DAV:basicsearch. > > > > > >Julian > > > > > >-- > > ><green/>bytes GmbH -- http://www.greenbytes.de -- tel:+492512807760 > > > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > Three simple steps. They guarantee your safety. > > http://server1.msn.co.in/features/general/SMBvirus/index.asp Protect > > yourself against the SMB.EXE virus. > > > _________________________________________________________________ Interact with peers. Learn from experts. http://server1.msn.co.in/sp03/teched/index.asp Be tech-empowered!
Received on Friday, 10 October 2003 15:24:05 UTC