W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-dist-auth@w3.org > January to March 2008

Thoughts on relation to WebDAV

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2008 11:55:44 +0100
Message-ID: <47DBAB30.1060306@gmx.de>
To: vcarddav@ietf.org, WebDAV <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>

Hi,

here are a few thoughts about how to handle the WebDAV dependencies of 
CardDAV (mostly based on what was discussed in the VCARDDAV WG meeting 
in Philadelphia):

1) WebDAV base requirements

I think CardDAV should require WebDAV level 3 support, as defined by RFC 
4918. It seems there was some confusion about what level 3 actually is: 
although 3 > 2, 3 does *not* include locking, it's just level 1 plus a 
few RFC 4918 extensions. And yes, it would be really great if Apache 
mod_dav would incorporate these few extensions.

2) Extended MKCOL, Reporting, Syncing

There are several things where CardDAV would benefit from generic WebDAV 
extensions, most of which are covered by Cyrus' proposals:

- using MKCOL to create "special" collections (instead of inventing new 
methods all the time) 
(<http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-daboo-webdav-mkcol-00.html>)

- potentially extract the REPORT method definition from RFC3253, and 
move it into a separate spec, including clarifications

- enhancements for syncing; Cyrus has proposed a new REPORT for this 
(<http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-daboo-webdav-sync-00>); I think we 
should try come up with a more generic solution to the 
GET-unfriendliness of PROPFIND and REPORT 
(<http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-reschke-http-get-location-00> and 
<http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/draft-reschke-http-get-location-latest.html>).

3) Where to discuss

I think it would be great if we would discuss everything that is not 
strictly related to CardDAV on the WebDAV mailing list (it's still an 
IETF mailing list, after all). This would help us to avoid introducing 
special solutions where generic solutions are needed.

These specifications still could be working group items; I'm neutral on 
whether they need to be, as long as they are developed in an open way, 
and get the necessary attention from the IESG when done (hint, hint).

BR, Julian

(crossposted to vcarddav and webdav mailing list)
Received on Saturday, 15 March 2008 10:56:43 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:44:16 GMT