W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-dist-auth@w3.org > October to December 2001

RE: RFC2518 (WebDAV) / RFC2396 (URI) inconsistency

From: Daniel Brotsky <dbrotsky@adobe.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2001 08:30:37 -0800
Message-Id: <p05101001b8296aad17f9@[192.168.1.4]>
To: "Jason Crawford" <ccjason@us.ibm.com>
Cc: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
1. I agree with Julian that we should make the 2518 revise be 
namespace-compliant.

2. I agree with Julian's suggestion that we table this for a few 
weeks while Lisa and others try again to get the "DAV:" string made 
an acceptable namespace.

3. If we can't get "DAV:" accepted, I agree with using Jason's suggestion:

At 11:06 AM -0500 11/23/01, Jason Crawford wrote:
>1) We pick a second URI for our namespace.  I'll suggest
>http://webdav.org/base.
>2) We update the spec to use this new URI in the examples.
>3) We deprecate  DAV: as the namespace URI in the spec.
>4) ASAP implementors start accepting the new URI in addition to DAV:
>5) Later implementors can start transmitting the new URI.

FWIW, I believe that making this change *will* eventually cause older 
DAV clients and servers to stop working, which I think was something 
Lisa raised in a different way.  I believe this because I think 
eventually the cost-savings of using common namespace-processing 
technology will cause the hand-written 
backwards-compatibly-accept-DAV: patches to become too expensive, at 
which point they will go away.  So

4. I agree that we will need an indicator (in OPTIONS) of 
spec-revision, and I believe that servers which *don't* accept "DAV:" 
should indicate that they are not "DAV servers" using the indicators 
that older clients look for.

     dan
-- 
Daniel Brotsky, Adobe Systems
tel 408-536-4150, pager 877-704-4062
2-way pager email: <mailto:page-dbrotsky@adobe.com>
Received on Tuesday, 27 November 2001 12:32:33 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:43:59 GMT