Subject: Re: Issue: OPTION_WITH_DEPTH

From: "Jason Crawford" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 20:43:03 -0400

Since noone else has spoken up, I'll respond just to try to get discussion
going.

<<
"Should the Depth header be usable with OPTIONS to perform a query of the
capabilities of all resources in a hierarchy?"

To me, the underlying issue is:

Do clients need to be able to query the capabilities of all resources in a
collection hierarchy in one network round trip?
Unless someone speaks out vigorously in favor of OPTIONS with depth header,
I suggest that we remain silent on that (to leave ourselves this option in
the future) and leave it on the issues list.

---

From: "Jim Whitehead" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 10:51:32 -0700

Since there have been two voices against, and none in favor, I'm going to
record this issue as resolved.  The status quo will continue, the
specification will be silent on this issue, neither providing support for
OPTION with Depth, nor forbidding it.

- Jim

Geoff Clemm writes:
> I agree with Jason.  Until a pressing need is identified for this
> feature, I would not introduce it in the next rev. of the spec.
> In the versioning protocol, we have been using live properties to
> reflect information that varies from resource to resource, while
> using OPTIONS only for information about "capabilities of the server",
> i.e. information that is the same for all resources implemented
> by a given server.