Subject: bind draft issues

From: Brian Korver <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2003 15:55:36 -0800

I like to bring up a couple of issues that I've found
with the bind draft.  I'll post more comprehensive comments
on the draft in a subsequent email.

Define "Resource"

The term "resource" should be defined in the draft.  I
imagine the definition is something along the lines of
"all content and all properties associated with that
content (including live and dead properties), but which
does not include properties associated with URIs."

Bindings and Locks

The relationship between bindings and locks is missing
from the draft.  I think the behavior of locks and the
lock methods should be fully specified in this draft.

URL Properties

The behavior of other URL properties (in addition to
locks) should be fully specified, for instance the
display-name property.

Move and Delete

The spec states that move and delete are merely operations
on bindings.  At the very least, this is inconsistent with
2518, but I also think that the draft doesn't adequately
address any of the issues that come up when the server
goes to "reclaim system resources."  I would expect most
servers to reclaim said resources during move and delete.

Operations not Atomic

None of the operations specified should be required
to be atomic.  I'd prefer SHOULD NOT myself.  This is
especially true for any operation that involves deleting
collections.

-brian
[email-masked]