Binding Extensions to Web Distributed Authoring and Versioning (WebDAV)
RFC 5842

Note: This ballot was opened for revision 27 and is now closed.

(Alexey Melnikov) Yes

(Jari Arkko) No Objection

(Ron Bonica) No Objection

(Ross Callon) No Objection

(Ralph Droms) No Objection

Comment (2009-06-03 for -** No value found for 'p.get_dochistory.rev' **)
No email
send info
Comment has been resolved...

-----
I don't understand the example in section 2.3.2.  How would the COPY operation update any bindings and affect the contents of R3?  If I understand the semantics as described in section 9.8.4 of RFC 4918, the result of the copy would result in deletion of the bindings in C2 to Resource C3, the deletion of C2, creation of a new C1 in CollY containing bindings x.gif and y.gif to new resources R1' and R2'.

(Lars Eggert) No Objection

(Pasi Eronen) No Objection

(Adrian Farrel) (was Discuss, No Objection, Discuss) No Objection

Comment (2009-08-13)
No email
send info
Comment fixed
Teenie nit...
Section 14
    and other members of the WebDAV working group.
But there is no WG.
Say...
    and other subscribers to the WebDAV mailing list.

(Russ Housley) No Objection

(Cullen Jennings) (was Discuss) No Objection

Comment (2009-06-04)
No email
send info
The WG LC was not correct in that it was done as a LC for a WG doc not an individual doc.

(Tim Polk) No Objection

Comment (2009-06-04 for -** No value found for 'p.get_dochistory.rev' **)
No email
send info
The Security Considerations section has a textual reference to the considerations for
HTTP/1.1 and WebDAV, but does not indicate which RFCs contain those considerations.
It would be helpful to readers if there were explicit references added for 2616, 3744 
and 4918 at that point in the text.

(Dan Romascanu) No Objection

(Robert Sparks) (was Discuss) No Objection

Comment (2009-06-03)
No email
send info
The document provides some discussion of the ramifications of simple loops, but its not immediately obvious that the recommendations for handling them are sufficient for dealing with more complex loops. Are there additional issues introduced when each added level of depth adds an exponentially growing number of elements? 

(view in fixed width)
        +---------+
        | root    |
        |         |
        |  start  |
        +---------+ 
             |
             v
        +---------+          +---------+ 
  +---->| C1      |          | C2      |<---+
  |  +->|         |          |         |<-+ |
  |  |  | a    b  |          | a    b  |  | |
  |  |  +---------+          +---------+  | |
  |  |    |    |               |    |     | |
  |  |    |    |          +----+    |     | |
  |  |    |    |          |         |     | |
  |  |    |    +----------c---+     |     | |
  |  |    |               |   |     |     | |
  |  |    |    +----------+   |     |     | |
  |  |    v    v              v     v     | |
  |  |  +---------+          +---------+  | |
  |  |  | C3      |          | C4      |  | |
  |  |  |         |          |         |  | |
  |  |  | a    b  |          | a    b  |  | |
  |  |  +---------+          +---------+  | |
  |  |    |    |               |    |     | |
  |  +----+    |          +----+    +-----+ |
  |            |          |                 |
  |            +----------c-----------------+
  |                       |
  +-----------------------+

(Lisa Dusseault) Abstain