W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xml-dist-app@w3.org > March 2000

Re: The Two Way Web

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2000 08:50:17 -0600
Message-ID: <38BFD129.C67480D2@w3.org>
To: Mark Baker <mark.baker@Canada.Sun.COM>
CC: Dave Winer <dave@userland.com>, "Box, Don" <dbox@develop.com>, xml-dist-app@w3.org, fielding@ics.uci.edu
Mark Baker wrote:
> Dave Winer wrote:
> > http://davenet.userland.com/2000/03/02/theTwowayweb
> Too bad I couldn't be there, but that was a good read.  Thanks.


> Some questions though, if you don't mind.
> In your talk, you said;
> > I heard people say yesterday that they've never heard a reason why
> > XML-RPC technology is needed, but hopefully at this point no one can
> > say that.  I believe the Two-Way-Web is the most compelling vision
> > since the Web itself.
> Why do you believe those two sentences go hand-in-hand?

Good question.

>  What's
> wrong with WebDAV[1] for the two-way-web?

Or just HTTP 1.1? See:

	Editing the Web: Detecting the Lost Update Problem Using Unreserved
              10 May 1999

and our Amaya editor that uses the libwww HTTP 1.1 implementation
to detect lost updates using HTTP 1.1 ETags
and Jigsaw, the server implementation, backed by CVS:

I use it daily. Works great.
WebDAV is essential for other kinds of management operations, and it
helps get digest authentication deployed, but for
just GET/PUT, HTTP 1.1 is all you need.

>  Or even Wiki[2] if
> low-tech is ok?

Wiki is cool. Sometimes I wonder if it's the technology or that
group of people. But the result is cool, regardless.

>  [1] http://www.ics.uci.edu/pub/ietf/webdav/
>  [2] http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?WikiWikiWeb
> MB

Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
office phone (thru approx. Mar 2000) tel:+1-512-310-2971
pager (put return tel# in From or Subject field)
Received on Friday, 3 March 2000 09:52:53 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 22:01:09 UTC