Subject: Re: Possible problem in collection definition

From: Jason Crawford <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2006 10:45:53 -0500

> > Not proposing what to do about this just yet.
> 
> We need to relax the language such that the server is allowed to
> suppress alias URLs. Let's just note this problem right now and fix it
> during WGLC.

How about letting the server flag the fact that it is facing such a 
situation and is being selective?  Via OPTIONS?  Or via information in the 
response?

---

From: Julian Reschke <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2006 16:54:37 +0100

Jason Crawford wrote:
> situation and is being selective?  Via OPTIONS?  Or via information in 
> the response?

That's a good idea, and our server is actually doing this. If you access 
a resource through an alias URL (such as "A" instead of "a"), we return 
a Content-Location header pointing to the canonical version of the URL. 
That maybe something to be added to 
<http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/draft-reschke-webdav-url-constraints-latest.html>.

But anyway, how does that help with the definition of collection state?

Best regards, Julian