Subject: New RFC2518bis draft

From: "Lisa Dusseault" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2002 22:21:24 -0700

A new version of the 2518bis is available. I'll submit it to the 
Internet-Drafts people shortly (to make the drafts cutoff).  There 
is a Word doc version as well as the txt version -- the Word doc 
version should have revision marks available.  Alternatively, you 
can take a look at the "RFC2518 Changes.doc" link to see a list of 
every change I've made and which of Jason's issues it's related to.

<http://www.webdav.org/wg/rfcdev/draft-ietf-webdav-rfc2518bis-01.txt> 
<http://www.webdav.org/wg/rfcdev/RFC2518%20Changes.doc>

Lisa

---

From: "Julian Reschke" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 30 Jun 2002 23:39:18 +0200

Hi,

I have reviewed the changes document and have the following
comments/concerns:

Section 2.1: Clarification on use of DAV: namespace

Replace

	"...SHOULD NOT be used in the request or response body of a versioning
method unless that XML element..."

by

	"...SHOULD NOT be used in the request or response method body unless that
XML element..."

Maybe we should also state that servers MAY reject attempts to delete or set
any property in the DAV: namespace which it doesn't know about.

Section 2.2: where to put xml:lang attribute

This may need to be clarified, but a better place is to do it where property
values are defined.

Section 3.2: XML may not be valid

Replace

	"However, legal XML may not be valid according to this DTD, because unknown
XML elements may appear in WebDAV syntax without making the syntax illegal."

by

	"However, legal XML will not be valid according to this DTD, because
unknown XML elements may appear in WebDAV syntax without making the syntax
illegal, and DTDs are fundamentally incompatible with XML namespace
processing."

Section 3.3: Attributes in property values are significant.

Do not add the new text. Instead, replace

	"The value of a property when expressed in XML MUST be well formed."

by

	"The value of a property element formally consists of the following items
defined in [XMLINFOSET], chapter 2.2:

-	Child element and character information items (element and text content),
-	Attributes,
-	Namespace attributes (as far as used by child information items)
-	In-scope namespaces (as far as used by child information items)
-	The value of an xml:lang attribute if in scope of the property element."

Section 3.8: Properties are live/protected

Note: will need to add definitions for "live" and "protected"

Section 4.2: Lock-null resources removed

Text mentions: "SHOULD default to reasonable, or reasonably blank, values
for other properties like getcontentlanguage"

I disagree: unknown properties should be treated as not being present (just
like the relevant HTTP headers), NOT as blank.

Section 4.3: allprop deprecated

STRONG disagreement. May I politely ask to answer my concerns raised in
February
(<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-dist-auth/2002JanMar/0232.html>).

Section 4.5: Propertybehavior (in MOVE, COPY) removed

Quote: "Live properties described in this document SHOULD be duplicated as
identically behaving live properties at the destination resource.  If a
property cannot be copied live, then its value MUST be duplicated,
octet-for-octet, in an identically named, dead property on the destination
resource. "

Comments:

1) did we reach consensus on this?
2) If we did, the wording "octet-by-octet" doesn't make sense (because we're
talking of property values)
3) However, I don't think we have agreement on this. Do you really want to
get dead copies of ACL or deltaV properties when copying from one part of
your server namespace to another????