- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2008 14:44:14 +0200
- To: www-webdav-dasl@w3.org
Hi, I've finished those changes that were simple, please review <http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/draft-reschke-webdav-search-latest.html> and <http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/draft-reschke-webdav-search-latest-from-previous.diff.html> for just the diffs. Note that I have been encouraged to aim for "Proposed Standard", so Appendix B has been renamed and rephrased accordingly. With respect to one of the points mentioned earlier...: > 1) Supported Scope > (<http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/draft-reschke-webdav-search-15.html#rfc.section.5.4.2>) > > > As far as I understand, the original authors wanted to allow cases where > a certain search arbiter could provide search functionality for a > distinct set of resources. Think http://google.com implementing SEARCH. > We all know that this hasn't been implemented in practice, but the > specification still allows it. > > This means that clients can discover pro grammatically that a resource > supports SEARCH, and what grammars it supports, but not the scopes that > can be specified. > > Now DAV:basicsearch is really designed for WebDAV resources. I assume > that all non-interactive clients assume that a search arbiter supporting > DAV:basicsearch really is capable of searching the URL namespace below > itself. Is this a sane assumption? Can we make that a SHOULD? My proposal is to make this a "SHOULD", and to mention the lack of scope discovery in the the "Future Extensions" appendix. > ... BR, Julian
Received on Friday, 27 June 2008 12:44:57 UTC