Re: AtomPubIssuesList for 2005/02/22

[Ezra Cooper <ezra@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

You've made your point that the URL structure is important for certain kinds
of operations--I wholeheartedly agree. But so far those features haven't
been proposed as part of the Atom spec.

And for people who want those features, all they have to do is to obey the
WebDAV spec.

Would it be enough to say something like this, to alert unwary implementers?

   Features X, Y and Z form a natural extension of this protocol
   but are not defined here. Implementors who may someday want
   to take advantage of features X, Y or Z should take care to
   obey the restrictions in the relevant specifications.

You seem to be lying down in the road to get people who don't care about X,
Y or Z to obey the relevant specifications.

Ezra
 

On 2/24/05 6:46 PM, "Robert Sayre" <mint@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
 
> It's very difficult if any URI can be member of any collection.
> 
> "COPY and MOVE semantics are not really operations on the target of the
> COPY and MOVE -- in fact, they are operations on the parent collections
> that "own" the origin and destination namespaces."[0]
> 
> "To achieve desirable outcomes for multiple containment cases, clients
> must have a way of clearly indicating that they want move semantics"[1]
> 
> The proposal at hand seems to allow multiple containment, prevent
> operations on the parent collection, and prevent clients from indicating
> they want move semantics.
> 
> Robert Sayre
> 
> [0] http://www.xent.com/pipermail/fork/2001-August/003191.html
> [1] http://www.xent.com/pipermail/fork/2001-August/003197.html
>