Hi, Cyrus,
I have been selected as the General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) reviewer for
this draft (for background on Gen-ART, please see
http://www.alvestrand.no/ietf/gen/art/gen-art-FAQ.html).
Please wait for direction from your document shepherd or AD before posting a
new version of the draft.
Document: draft-ietf-vcarddav-webdav-mkcol-05
Reviewer: Spencer Dawkins
IETF LC End Date: 2009-08-17
Review Date: 2009-08-07
IESG Telechat date: (not known)
Summary: This document is almost ready for publication as a Proposed
Standard. I have some minor comments (identified as "Spencer (minor)" in the
following text, but nothing that should slow document approval. In
particular, I'm pretty sure I identified an error in the title for Section
3.5 below.
Comments identified as "Spencer (clarity)" are provided for editors, but are
not part of the Gen-ART review.
Abstract
This specification extends the Web Distributed Authoring and
Versioning (WebDAV) MKCOL method to allow collections of arbitrary
resourcetype to be created and to allow properties to be set at the
same time.
Spencer (clarity): I know that RFC 4918 didn't provide an expansion for
MKCOL until about page 46 (or maybe 25, in passing), but since MKCOL appears
in the abstract for this document, it might be helpful to s/MKCOL/MKCOL
("Make Collection")/ here. MKCOL is defined at first use in the
Introduction, so that's fine - this is only a suggestion about the abstract.
3. WebDAV extended MKCOL
The WebDAV MKCOL request is extended to allow the inclusion of a
request body. The request body is an XML document containing a
single DAV:mkcol XML element as the root element. The Content-Type
Spencer (minor): if I'm reading this paragraph correctly, I'd suggest "The
request body is an XML document that MUST contain a single DAV:mkcol XML
element as the root element" here - the last sentence in this paragraph
makes me think the requirement is normative, but it doesn't look normative
to 2119 scanners :-)
request header MUST be set appropriately for an XML body (e.g., set
to "text/xml" or "application/xml"). XML-typed bodies for an MKCOL
request that do not have DAV:mkcol as the root element are reserved
for future usage.
As per the PROPPATCH method ([RFC4918], Section 9.2), servers MUST
process any DAV:set instructions in document order (an exception to
the normal rule that ordering is irrelevant). Instructions MUST
either all be executed or none executed. Thus, if any error occurs
Spencer (clarity): this sentence reads roughly to me, and it's 2119
language, so needs to be clear. I suggest "The set of instructions MUST be
executed atomically; either all are executed or none are executed".
during processing, all executed instructions MUST be undone and a
proper error result returned. Failure to set a property value on the
collection MUST result in a failure of the overall MKCOL request -
i.e. the collection is not created.
3.5. Example: Successful Extended MKCOL Request
Spencer (minor): Perhaps this should be s/Successful/Unsuccessful/? It's
returning a 403/424 :D
4. Replacing Existing MKxxx Methods
Spencer (clarity): Hmm. This section (and 4.1, and 4.1.1) aren't quite about
REPLACING existing MKxxx methods, but more like "Providing MKxxx
functionality using extended MKCOL". Would that be clearer? The current text
in 4.1 sent me looking to see whether "replacement" meant "deprecation" (it
doesn't, if I'm reading clearly), for example.
One of the goals of this extension is to eliminate the need for other
extensions to define their own variant of MKCOL to create the special
collections they need. This extension can be used to replace
existing MKxxx methods in other extensions as detailed below. If a
server supports this extension and the other extension listed, then
the server MUST support use of the extended MKCOL method to achieve
the same result as the MKxxx method of the other extension.
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf