Subject: [Bug 5] Bindings and DeltaV aren't fully interspecified

From: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 23:44:15 -0800

http://ietf.cse.ucsc.edu:8080/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5

[email-masked] changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|REOPENED                    |RESOLVED
         Resolution|                            |WORKSFORME

------- Additional Comments From [email-masked]  2004-12-02 23:44 -------
"Can a client replace a Working Resource with a binding to some existing
resource?  If so, what does that do when it does CHECKIN that working resource?"

You can't replace resources with bindings. You can remove bindings, add bindings
or overwrite bindings with other bindings. If you replace a binding to a WR by a
binding to something else, the URI now identifies a different resource. It's
impossible to say how that one behaves without knowing what it is. Please be
more specific.

"can a client use BIND to create a binding to a workspace?  Can a client use 
BIND to create a binding to an activity?  etc. for each new resource type
defined in RFC3253... MUST the server support each of these operations?"

I have no opinion on these, and I doubt that you can get RFC3253 implementers to
agree on it. I'm not sure why this is relevant for BIND. If a server doesn't
support additional bindings for a specific resource, a BIND request will fail.

"When a property contains an href, and that href points to a resource with
multiple bindings, "it doesn't matter which binding is reported by the server".
Ok, fine -- so we need to state that the server could show any binding URL and
the client MUST be able to handle that."

That's a RFC3253 issue, not a BIND issue. See
<http://www.webdav.org/deltav/protocol/rfc3253-issues-list.htm>, issue
1.4.5_STABLE_HREF.

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.