W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-dist-auth@w3.org > October to December 2002

RE: FW: I-D ACTION:draft-dusseault-dav-quota-01.txt

From: Lisa Dusseault <lisa@xythos.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2002 14:32:56 -0700
To: "'Eric Sedlar'" <eric.sedlar@oracle.com>, "'Clemm, Geoff'" <gclemm@rational.com>, "'Webdav WG'" <w3c-dist-auth@w3c.org>
Message-ID: <000001c27adb$c1237c70$620afea9@xythoslap>

But we *do* have implementations -- Xythos WebFile Server and Apple
iDisk both implement quota with WebDAV properties to expose the values.
This implementation experience, and the desire to have interoperability
between the clients and servers from these two implementers, led to the
writing of the draft.  

Thus, the draft is fairly reliably known to work for 
 - the Sharemation model, where every user is given a quota tied to
their home directory but they can assign sub-quotas to sub-directories
if they want
 - the iDisk model, where every user is given a home directory and a
single top-level quota
 - the WFS corporate customer model, where users put their stuff in
shared directories like 'dev', 'sales', 'hr' -- and so you can *only*
measure quota by directory, not by user.

We always have a temptation to make designs "more generally
applicable".. However sometimes I fear we fall in the trap of making the
designs too extensible, too theoretical, too much like a framework, and
in general too complex to actually reasonable accomplish what are
sometimes modest goals.

Lisa

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Eric Sedlar [mailto:eric.sedlar@oracle.com]


> You can't complain about not having implementations of the
draft--there's
> always
> a chicken & egg problem here.  
Received on Wednesday, 23 October 2002 17:33:11 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:44:02 GMT