- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2003 23:13:48 +0100
- To: "Brian Korver" <briank@xythos.com>, "WebDAV" <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <JIEGINCHMLABHJBIGKBCCEDKGKAA.julian.reschke@gmx.de>
> From: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org > [mailto:w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Brian Korver > Sent: Monday, March 03, 2003 8:12 PM > To: WebDAV > Subject: Re: bind draft issues > > > > On Saturday, March 1, 2003, at 06:27 AM, Clemm, Geoff wrote: > > > > From: Brian Korver [mailto:briank@xythos.com] > > > > URL Properties > > > > The behavior of other URL properties (in addition to > > locks) should be fully specified, for instance the > > display-name property. > > > > I'm not aware of the binding protocol causing any change > > to the behavior of the properties defined by 2518. Also > > note that a resource has properties, not a URL. > > Geoff, > > URLs have properties to. Think about how DAV:lockdiscovery > works in the face of COPY/MOVE, or DAV:displayname for that > matter. Brian, properties are *never* on URLs, they are always on the resource. So if you have multiple bindings to the same resource, a PROPFIND on each of these bindings should yield the same results. So DAV:lockdiscovery and DAV:displayname indeed do *not* depend on the binding to which the PROPFIND is applied. > Regarding this issue, I was not suggesting that the problem > is that the binding protocol changed the behavior of properties, > just that the behavior needs to be fully specified. Do > you feel that 2518 does fully specify the behavior of > URL properties? :-) If we agree on that there are no "URL properties", there's nothing that needs to be defined. Julian -- <green/>bytes GmbH -- http://www.greenbytes.de -- tel:+492512807760
Received on Monday, 3 March 2003 17:14:35 UTC