[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Simple] WGLC: XCAP Base
A few comments/questions.
8.5 Managing Etags
As Jonathan has interpreted (complying with rfc2616) that a node or even
an attribute of an xml-document can be regarded as a resource is it
allowable to send the document ETag after partial delete which is then
actually an ETag of a different resource ? I would certainly prefer that
it is still being sent as otherwise you introduce a second deficiency
into safe updates of the document (the first one being partial append).
This would mean that only partial modifies are safe. I can think only
ugly solutions to this IMO annoying problem which is mostly due to the
fact that partial updates were (naturally) not thought when http was
created.
6.3 Node selector
Although I have already commented on the default namespace issue I'll
repeat it here: XPath 1.0 has the interpretation that namespace uri is
null if the location step prefix is empty. The upcoming XPath 2.0 seems
to use the element context which is the only sane way in XCAP, too. So
just clearly state that in the text (otherwise compliant with XPath 1.0).
7 Client Operations
I am sorry to repeat but I still don't understand idempotent delete.
What should the server do during "a subsequent DELETE to the same URI
should FIND the resource deleted..." ? I don't understand find here.
---------------
I still miss non-default namespace examples. Also in all examples where
location steps exist there should be more predicates to imply that each
step has to point to a single element.
Also I havn't noticed any discussions in the mailing lists about caching
proxies as they will certainly try to cache responses unless
Cache-Control or Expires headers are used. So some recommendations are
needed in the text.
BR,
Jari
_______________________________________________
Simple mailing list
Simple at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple