Re: [scim] Issue#25 consensus call

Yes, I presented root search as optional. In the particular section below I was attempting to make clear what are now valid queries. However it missed the issue of whether the server supports it. 

Phil

On 2013-04-11, at 9:19, Leif Johansson <leifj@mnt.se> wrote:

> On 04/11/2013 06:08 PM, Kelly Grizzle wrote:
>> I agree with everything in the proposal except for one thing:
>> 
>>  Queries MAY be performed against a SCIM:
>>  <list>
>>    <t>Resource (e.g. /Users/{userid}),</t>
>>    <t>Resource Type endpoint (e.g. /Users or /Groups), or</t>
>>    <t>Server Root (e.g. /).</t>
>>  </list>
>> 
>> IMO querying against the server root should be optional and that SP's should declare support in ServiceProviderConfig.  For directory-backed datastores, this will be easy to support.  However, if the SP is using a relational database backed datastore, this could be difficult to implement in a way that scales.
> I suggest you update the ticket so that the proposal is clear - I
> believe this was
> already covered in Orlando though.
>> 
>> --Kelly
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: scim-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:scim-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Leif Johansson
>> Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2013 1:26 PM
>> To: scim WG
>> Subject: [scim] Issue#25 consensus call
>> 
>> 
>> Folks,
>> 
>> At Orlando we polled the room and there was clear consensus for closing
>> 25 as suggested in the issue tracker.
>> 
>> This email serves as a confirmation for that consensus call - speak up now if you disagree.
>> 
>>        Leif & Morteza
>> _______________________________________________
>> scim mailing list
>> scim@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/scim
> 
> _______________________________________________
> scim mailing list
> scim@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/scim