W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-dist-auth@w3.org > October to December 2005

Re: Summary of ETag related issues in RFC2518bis

From: Cullen Jennings <fluffy@cisco.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2005 16:11:48 -0800
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
CC: WebDav <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>
Message-ID: <BFCC8C44.6615B%fluffy@cisco.com>

On 12/19/05 3:03 PM, "Julian Reschke" <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote:

> Cullen Jennings wrote:
>> Let's say Alice has a compliant webdav client that stores gif files, and Bob
>> has a compliant dav server? Will these things work together?
>> 
>> I can imagine a couple answers:
>> 
>> 1) we don't know, it might work, it might not - there is really no way to
>> know
> 
> As of now (RFC2616 + RFC2518), we don't know. A server is free to reject
> whatever it feels to. If anybody thinks this is not the case, please
> back that up with references to normative specification text.
> 
> But is it good that a client won't know until it tries, potentially
> getting a 415 status code? No, thus the proposal to make that feature
> discoverable.

Ok, so what is your advice to client implementers? Do you want to specify
something they can count on working? XML works? 7 bit ascii works? XHTML
works? Getting a 415 might tell you the end user why it failed (though
probably not given most client software) but it is not going to make it
work. 

If people are comfortable with there is no guarantee that even the most
trivial things will interoperate with this protocol, I'm not pushing it. I'm
just a checking that I correctly understand this as I find it slightly
surprising. 

Cullen
Received on Tuesday, 20 December 2005 00:12:04 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:44:12 GMT