W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-dist-auth@w3.org > January to March 2004

Re: locking clarifications/extensions vs BIND draft vs RFC2518bis

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 21:12:01 +0100
Message-ID: <40084591.2050008@gmx.de>
To: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org

In an off-list mail, Geoff Clemm wrote:

 > I would strongly advocate separating locking from base WebDAV
 > functionality
 > for the following reasons:
 >
 > - WebDAV is already a family of specs (3253, ACL, redirect, ordering),
 > each of which defines an optional feature-package beyond what
 > is defined
 > in the base spec.  It would be more consistent to handle locking
 > (which is an optional feature-package) the same way.
 >
 > - Having a smaller "base WebDAV spec" I believe will make WebDAV more
 > accessible to new implementors, since the base spec will be
 > less daunting
 > in
 > size.  You don't have to read/understand the locking extensions to
 > understand versioning, ACL, redirect, or ordering, but the current
 > packaging of locking in with the base protocol makes it look
 > like you do.
 >
 > - It allows us to make more rapid progress on getting the locking
 > functionality standardized (i.e. it doesn't have to wait until we've
 > resolved all the other issues in 2518bis).

I agree on all these points. However, for this plan to work we need

- buy-in from the RFC2518bis authors (Lisa and Jason),
- volunteers for the new document and
- broad support from the working group members (that is, this mailing list)

Regards, Julian

-- 
<green/>bytes GmbH -- http://www.greenbytes.de -- tel:+492512807760
Received on Friday, 16 January 2004 15:12:18 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 5 February 2014 07:17:51 UTC